Huh.
GOODBYE air pollution and smoky chimneys, hello brighter days. That’s been the trend in Europe for the past three decades – but unfortunately cleaning up the skies has allowed more of the sun’s rays to pierce the atmosphere, contributing to at least half the warming that has occurred.
Cleaner air or a hotter earth: You pays your money and you takes your pick.
Does this really make sense? I’d think that if there were a lot of smoke in the atmosphere, the sun’s rays would tend to get absorbed by that smoke…absorbed at a higher altitude than if the smoke had not been there, but absorbed nonetheless.
It’s called global dimming and the guy who started bringing it to the forefront is Israeli I think. He took a lot of flack at first. Now I think the most generally accepted take on it is that without global dimming – global warming would be even worse but that the underlying issue of warming is still due to green-house gasses.
This makes me assume that the answer to the problem is not clear skys or heat but rather a need to deal with what causes the heat as we clear the skys. And when I say the answer – I mean the one that would be put forward by folks that think human behavior is the root cause. I’m not really convinced either way myself.
For those not busy creating databases for new Siebel installs today, I’d start reading over here.
As an quick antidote, someone can propose the “Nuclear Winter” effects as predicted by Carl Sagan.
This whole global warming thing is the biggest hoax of the last hundred years – Yellow Science at its worst.
Someone please explain the increase in the number of severe storms on Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune. This theory has been pulled out of Uranus, or better said — their anus.
Look up at the Sun. It’s a slightly variable star, like 99.99% of the others.
“Cleaner air or a hotter earth:”
AND, I think.
Wait a minute, I thought Carbon emissions were causing the Global Warming, now this says a bunch of Carbon in the atmospheere protects us from Global Warming?
Seriously, I think it’s the sun myself.
Seriously, Idaho Joe, most of these global warmingists are talking through their collective hats. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant — or if it is, so is oxygen. And try running this globe without either. Can’t be done. As Jules Crittenden said, not so long ago, “the earth warms, the earth cools, and nobody quite knows why” — certainly not the global warmingists. At any rate, the globe has not warmed detectably since 1998, and in fact has been cooling. This has caused desperation among all those folks who have invested Big Money in this particular scam, and who weren’t smart enough, as the Goracle was, to establish his own carbon offset company, from which he buys his carbon offsets.
The latest meme of the warmingists is that we’re scheduled for a ten-year “vacation” from global warming, after which it is scheduled to come back worse than ever.
I caution suspension of belief on this one. If the weather predictors can’t predict the weather reliably more than three days ahead — and we all know they can’t — how can you count on them to be right about manmade global warming?
Marianne
I see now the target is methane, mainly from cattle. So much worse than CO2, you know. Has to be causing problems.
Which, thinking about the millions of buffalo that used to fart and thunder their way across the plains (not as their primary means of propulsion, you understand), shouldn’t we be due some kind of credit? For, you know, wiping them out? Haven’t heard anybody mention that yet…
Speaking of carbon credits, I wonder how that whole process works? Because it would seem any plant would reduce the level of CO2 in the surrounding air. Which would mean I could sell carbon credits to somebody and in return not have to mow my lawn. Kind of a win-win situation for me. Anybody have Al Gore’s phone number?
– Max
I realize there are conflicting opinions on almost everything, but it’s refreshing to be among people who think like me, especially on this issue.
My take is there would be no global warming crisis if there wasn’t money and power to be made off it. But then, what do I know?
What do you know, Idaho Joe? Apparently plenty … certainly enough not to be suckered by this particular con. Congratulations!
Marianne
What was the latest dollar estimate to control anthropogenic climate change? I think I saw somewhere a figure of a trillion dollars. That to me was the moment of comprehension. The Gore’s of the world see that as an infinite cash pool to do with as they please. If they can convince the chicken littles that the world is coming to an end, then what is a little tax increase to prevent it. Moreover, if they can convince the chicken littles of the world ending, how hard will it be to convince them that they deserve these ultralarge salaries because they’re working soooo hard to protect them. Marianne has it right, it’s the biggest scam in the history of mankind. And Glenn Reynolds has the right saying “I’ll believe it’s a crisis when the people saying it’s a crisis start acting like it’s a crisis.”
Juvat’s right. The best example was when I believe a large coalition of economists stated that the cost to *possibly* control climate change was much higher than the cost of doing nothing. Thus, if the billions were dumped into nuclear research, better urban planning, and medicine, the world would be much better off.
Sadly, my favorite CO2 producer is in the shop, but I’ll be back out there fighting global cooling soon enough.
This is all too confusing. I think we need to go back to the previous post about beer.
That made a lot more sense….
In the intersets of scientific research, I think I will have one. Or more.
I know this: by the end of the year, I have about 15 different training modules I must complete, in order to better understand the monitoring system we are installing on our plant for CO2 emissions. I know that by next year, we’ll be reporting out via an online system constantly being monitored what those CO2 levels will be. I also know that somebody is making a killing off of the systems and equipment, not to mention the possibilities for the monitoring agencies to impose fines on us (BAAQMD…). Oh, and what is it we make???? What is this Evil Elixer that we pollute so greedily with for profit? Hydrogen. For removal of sulfur from diesel and gasoline during the refining process. You know, to make the air “cleaner”. This is all a 3-Card Monty shell-game illusion propogated by tight-sphinctered-nut-whackers bent on making us all drive rickshaws, and wear hemp underwear.
Max D… here’s a “hook-up” for a cow methane catcher. Good luck mounting it on your buffalo.
http://bp2.blogger.com/_3QqO8EXd-II/SHXHRG93×6I/AAAAAAAAV-M/iXaUwDlevNU/s1600-h/cow-gas.jpg
Add to the man-made causation theory silliness re: Global Warming…. is the RICO statute, money laundering scam with Carbon Credits.
“…if there were a lot of smoke in the atmosphere, the sun’s rays would tend to get absorbed by that smoke..”
They do absorb radiant heat, but it doesn’t stop there. They also emit those excited photons, but in random directions, sometimes back upstairs, rather continuing on down to the ground.
The end result being that the ground ends up being heated less, which heats the air above it less, etc.
So yes, there is some difference.