On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:19:32 GMT, Doug Bashford wrote:

in rec.radio.shortwave, David said about:
( OT) Global Warming, a primer . .


On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:30:14 +0000 (UTC), "Larry"
wrote:

It's going to be difficult for those people to explain the very real
fact that the earth has been measurably cooling for the last eight
years, in spite of an increase in CO2 levels.

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/env...2006_warm.html

nasa.gov ???
That says:

Okay, let's stick with NASA. Last year, NASA published a report which said
that earth's oceans have significantly cooled since 2003
(http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2006...n_Cooling.txt).

The World Meteorological Organization's data show that 2006 was cooler
than 2005, which was cooler than 2004, which was cooler than 2003, etc.,
and so the WMO agrees with the NASA observations. Since the oceans have
a large thermal inertia, they cool and warm significantly later than
does the atmosphere itself. Unfortunately, the WMO (http://www.wmo.ch)
has moved its data since I last accessed it, so I'll have to keep on
digging to find the graphs they produced.

An Assistant Professor of physics at MIT has summarized the data on his blog at
http://motls.blogspot.com/2006/12/20...r-in-last.html,
and you can access part of it there.

The question is not the temperature during the last decade as compared
to earlier decades, but rather the TREND in the current average annual
temperature (which is downward). As the NASA paper says, a downward
trending temperature is something which is not predicted by current
models, and NASA intends to improve its models to take this "speed
bump" into account.

Guess the models aren't that reliable after all ...

[Newsgroups trimmed to original group.]

In article ,
(Doug Bashford) wrote:


in rec.radio.shortwave, David said about:
( OT) Global Warming, a primer . .


On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:30:14 +0000 (UTC), "Larry"
wrote:

It's going to be difficult for those people to explain the very real
fact that the earth has been measurably cooling for the last eight
years, in spite of an increase in CO2 levels.

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/env...2006_warm.html

nasa.gov ???
That says:

=============begin quotes

2006 Was Earth's Fifth Warmest Year in the past century

02.08.07

Graphic listing the top five warmest years recorded Climatologists at
the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City
have found that 2006 was the fifth warmest year in the past century.

Image right:
The five warmest years since
the late 1880s, according to NASA scientists,
are in descending order
2005,
1998,
2002,
2003 and
2006.
Credit: NASA

Other groups that study climate change also rank these years as among
the warmest, though the exact rankings vary depending upon details of
the analyses. Results differ especially in regions of sparse
measurements, where scientists use alternative methods of estimating
temperature change.

Goddard Institute researchers used temperature data from weather
stations on land, satellite measurements of sea surface temperature
since 1982 and data from ships for earlier years.
=============end quotes.

Thanks David!

Yeah, thanks for nothing. It's been cooler around here on the coast.
http://www.calclim.dri.edu/cgi-bin/anomimage.pl?cal1mTxdep.gif

I guess the next ice age is just around the corner for the California
coast.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

On Apr 22, 9:22 am, "Larry" wrote:
On 22 Apr 2007 04:18:41 -0700, wrote:



http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/Featur...GlobalWarming&...

That so-called "primer" neglects to mention that water vapor is a major
greenhouse gas and that water vapor constitutes 95% of the greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere. That makes water vapor (which comes mostly
from the oceans) THE most important greenhouse gas because of its
overwhelming presence.

The "primer" also neglects to mention that the oceans absorb / release a
great deal of atmospheric CO2 as their temperatures change, complicating
any simple-minded attempt to relate atmospheric CO2 to human production
of CO2.

As the debate continues in the public realm, the average person is going
to realize that the alarmists aren't making much scientific sense at
all. That will be a good thing and may save all of us from needless and
damaging public policy.

Some of the information here seems to indicate that a biproduct of the
glaciers cooling is methane gas. Perhaps we should be looking to
harnessing this source as a potential alternative fuel. See the
following link for coalbed methane which is being widely developed in
the midwest.

http://coalbed.com/slides/sld001.htm

Just a thought - should anyone want to start up a new business.

On Apr 22, 10:22 am, "Larry" wrote:
On 22 Apr 2007 04:18:41 -0700, wrote:



http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/Featur...GlobalWarming&...

That so-called "primer" neglects to mention that water vapor is a major
greenhouse gas and that water vapor constitutes 95% of the greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere. That makes water vapor (which comes mostly
from the oceans) THE most important greenhouse gas because of its
overwhelming presence.

- Link??


The "primer" also neglects to mention that the oceans absorb / release a
great deal of atmospheric CO2 as their temperatures change, complicating
any simple-minded attempt to relate atmospheric CO2 to human production
of CO2.

- Link ??

As the debate continues in the public realm, the average person is going
to realize that the alarmists aren't making much scientific sense at
all. That will be a good thing and may save all of us from needless and
damaging public policy.

- So, you're saying that man, and his activities, are NOT affecting
Global Climate at all ??

http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/...385/index.html

Texas recently had some bad weather.Some of that weather is heading East
toward me right now. www.halandmals.com Mal's St.Paddy's
Day,weather link.5:00 PM WAPT tv news is cranking up right now.Eleven
dead,heavy property damage in Texas and Mexico.David South on WAPT
www.wapt.com says no tornado warnings right now and he doesn't expect
any.I hope he is right,he usually is.We need the rain,we don't need
tornados.
cuhulin

On 25 Apr 2007 08:32:52 -0700, wrote:

On Apr 22, 10:22 am, "Larry" wrote:
On 22 Apr 2007 04:18:41 -0700, wrote:



http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/Featur...GlobalWarming&...

That so-called "primer" neglects to mention that water vapor is a major
greenhouse gas and that water vapor constitutes 95% of the greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere. That makes water vapor (which comes mostly
from the oceans) THE most important greenhouse gas because of its
overwhelming presence.

- Link??


The "primer" also neglects to mention that the oceans absorb / release a
great deal of atmospheric CO2 as their temperatures change, complicating
any simple-minded attempt to relate atmospheric CO2 to human production
of CO2.

- Link ??

As the debate continues in the public realm, the average person is going
to realize that the alarmists aren't making much scientific sense at
all. That will be a good thing and may save all of us from needless and
damaging public policy.

- So, you're saying that man, and his activities, are NOT affecting
Global Climate at all ??

http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/...385/index.html



And that the IPCC hasn't factored-in the natural processes...