Ping Bil Slowman; The global warming hoax reveiled

The wikipedia article quotes IPCC numbers. Unfortunately anything from the IPCC is suspect given that Mann/Jones et al seem to have acted as bouncers for the consensus.

Methane has begun rising, again.

The Copenhagen Diagnosis:

"The concentration of methane (CH4) in the atmosphere increased since 2007 to 1800 parts per billion (ppb) after almost a decade of little change (Figure 2). The causes of the recent increase in CH4 have not yet been determined. The spatial distribution of the CH4 increase shows that an increase in Northern Hemisphere CH4 emissions has played a role and could dominate the signal (Rigby et al. 2008), but the source of the increase is unknown."

Just a footnote.

Jon

Sloman

Yup, Clear Lake, about 100 miles from here. Last activity 10000 years ago. Oh, now I won't be able sleep anymore ...

I am not going to comment as you obviously do not know much about that profession. Rest assured that if you do get into cardiac trouble the stuff we have designed here is fully validated and safe. The major hospitals in your country have it.

Since 2004. Not exactly a long and thorough test. Plus it looks like it's under the ocean, not cities.

Quote: "Initial investigations in the USA indicate that it may be possible to inject CO2 into gas fields that are approaching the end of their productive lives and enhance gas production, without contamination of the residual gas. Further research into CO2 enhanced gas production is required. If, however, it is established that the process is technically feasible, then the overall cost of CO2 capture and storage could be similar to that in oil fields."

I assume you know the meaning of the li'l word "may" :-)

Hint: No, it's not a month.

Like where?

The nastiest one in a very long time was Mount St.Helens. And the folks killed there were AFAIR those who dared to climb up fully knowing it could go off any minute.

Sloman

One can only hope that Slowman will get a cardiologist who is so ignorant to have never heard of tPA ;-)

So effective that I went from chest-crushing pain to, "Can I go home now?", in a few minutes time. ...Jim Thompson

nce has

cted by

of by

resume

that

t's

to

James Arthur thinks that climate models can't predict any more than a fortnight ahead before they blow up. Oddly enough they can, but weather models can't.

And he still thinks that he is in a position to tell us that the evidence for anthropogenic global warming is a fraud?

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

by

sume

at

I wonder which dinner party gave him that mystical insight?

If it was the same one that convinced him that climate models were as subject to the butterfly effect as weather models, it would seem that someone was sending him up.

They did rather too good a job of it. The clown still doesn't seem to have noticed that he was being sent up.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

by

ume

re

Sure. Any paranoid could draw that conclusion from these e-mails, but a paranoid could equally draw that conclusion from a laundry list.

Those of us who don't have a visceral need to believe in idiotic conspiracy theories just see scientists peeved by people who are wasting their time, and working out how to pay them back in their own coin.

Not edifying. But these people have been harassed for years by McIntyre and similar people who seem to be subsidised to spend their times sabotaging serious scientific research, so they are perfectly entitled to a a measure of irritation.

Since denialist propaganda is all about purging, or a least devaluing, inconvenient truths one can understand why they are so enthusiastic about it, and so ready to claim that the Hadley Centre scientists are in fact doing what they have been trying to do for years. It's pure wish-fulfilment.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

That Ravinghorde's province. He can see "withholding embarrassing raw data" in perfectly innocuous e-mails between people who don't want to have to put in the considerable - and unrewarded - labour involved in making the data accessible and comprehensible. He feels free to invent the "embarrassing" aspect because the poor dear doesn't have a clue about the magnitude of the task.

Face it. The stolen e-mails don't contain any evidence of actual wrong- doing, because if they did we'd have heard about from somebody who isn't a member of the lunatic fringe, a group of which you are now a card-carrying member.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

f by

esume

hat

's

to

A genuine James Arthur pratfall. Not a collectible as all that - he makes a fool of himself a little too often, and the market is getting saturated.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

oman

rgy=3D

the=3D

man=3D

I don't say it about everybody, but there are a number of people who post here on subjects that they know very little about, and they quite often post total nonsense.

isl=3D

internet

Netherlands

It is a pity you don't seem to be equipped to make sesne of all this information.

(high) energy > price,

more further > on.

Get up to date. the Danes have been doing it for years.

Not me, but it has been done by others

robably be

Not really. Nobody ever found natural gas under Nijmegen.

ss.

where all

climate

I don't see any necessity to accept the climate cycles, and I'm delighted that we have generated enough anthropogenic global warming to prevent the the next ice age, which would have been due any millenium now.

However, one can have too much of good thing, and persisting in injecting CO2 into the atmosphere has the potential to make as big a mess of our civilisation as would the start of a new ice age.

the climate, > maybe it will happen one day.

If you had learned a bit more science when you were young, you'd be aware that burning fossil carbon is an all-too-effective form of terraforming.

Not for any extended period, but it would help to bridge the gap while we are still building the windmills and the solar power plants that we will need to replace coal, oil and gas-powered energy sources that we rely on at the moment.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

On a sunny day (Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:18:18 -0800 (PST)) it happened Bill Sloman wrote in :

I am so sorry, SO SORRY SOOOOOOOOOO I did not realize that this is your

Sure, But you conveniently - and dishonestly - ignored the fact that I was making a point about electricity.

Considering that your debating tactics of necessity have to involve distracting people from the fatuous claims you make and subsequently can't support, this is delicious.

In fact the read is about a bunch of denialist nitsits trying to claim that bunch of hacked e-amils contain evidence of lying, manipulating data, conspiring against competitors, and so forth.

You have to be a seriously demented ehthusiasm for conspiracy theories to read that into any of the e-mails I've seen, and nobody who has any credibility to preserve has endorsed any such claim.

Of course not, it is nonsense.

This is a little transparent. James Arthur was silly enough to reveal that his "inside information" on global warming fraud was somebody in the business telling him that global climate models break down if asked to predict further ahead than a fornight, this revealing that he doesn't know the difference between a global weather model - which is subject to the butterfly effect - and a global climate model which isn't.

This revealed that his claim to know anything about anthropogenic global warming was a total fraud, and he has been trying to distract attention from ths ever since.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

With any luck he'll get a doctor who knows him.

That was Joel Koltner's claim and he stuck a smilely after it.

Try not to be quite so transparently stupid.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Jan Panteltje has strange ideas about what constituties total bull.

cycles.

Quite wrong. I know that not "storing CO2 under your bed" has stopped one natural climate cycle. The next ice age, due to happen any millenium now, has been put on hold by the anthropogenic global warming that we have managed so far.

I also know that we can't store enough CO2 under our collective beds to avoid more serious anthropogenic global warming if we continue to dig up and burn fossil carbon at the current rate, but we may be able to store enough to prevent serious warming before we build enough windmills and sloar power plants to replace most of our current energy sources.

Given the strange and irrational ideas that Jan Panteltje endorses, I'd be quite worried if he didn't think that I was confused. One of his silly ideas is that I get my ideas about global warming from Al Gore. I've had enough scientific training to be able to get my ideas about anthropogenic global warming from rather closer to the scientific sources.

Finding out that you have been talking nonsense can be damaging to the ego. Jan Panteltje's ego seems to have been protecting itself from this damaging revelation for quite some time now.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

snip wasted calculations and earlier comment.

That's a good idea, but let's paste it in sequence;

The French genenrate most of their electric power from nuclear reactors and yet you claimed

Just admit you have no clue and are wrong.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

But completely irrelevant to your "fact check" of the French nuclear claims.

No, you wanted to show Bill was wrong. That's why you wrote

"let's whip out the calculator and fact-check the authoritative Mr. Bill"

So far we've heard you were fact checking, then it was bringing Bill back on topic, and now it's "I wanted to know how dependent. So I added it up." Hmmm.

Why didn't you attempt to bring Jan back on topic? He was the first in the thread to move away from the subject line when he mentioned proposals to store CO2 underground near where he lives.

No, Bill responded to Jan's concerns about living above a CO2 store. Subsequently the thread diverged into the usual wide ranging stuff. If you can't handle that you'll need to leave usenet :-)

There's still the matter of why you claimed to be fact checking Bill's nuclear claims when you were apparently really trying to bring him back on topic. I guess you also have trouble comprehending your own writing.

I'm not defending Bill, I'm critiquing you.

-- Regards Malcolm Remove sharp objects to get a valid e-mail address

nothing to do with climate.

That's correct, you introduced nuclear energy, to which Bill replied about the French proportion of nuclear electricity generation.

The only thing you could regard as an inaccuracy in your highlighted quote is his claim "You don't seem to have realised", but I don't think that was intended to be taken literally.

"burning fossil carbon isn't the only way to generate energy." is accurate, as was his claim about the French nuclear industry.

I don't see why you claim I'm manipulating reality with regard to the quoted posts? As I mentioned in my reply to dagwhatever, you were the first to move the thread from the subject matter. That's fine, that happens on usenet. However, he then "fact checked" a claim that was never made, and you're supporting him. Weird.

-- Regards Malcolm Remove sharp objects to get a valid e-mail address