Thread: holy cannoli
View Single Post
Old 02-09-2012, 05:16 PM
handle handle is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: holy cannoli

Never mind that this op-ed flies in the face of the original one you started this thread with, It's still an unfair and gross oversimplification of the case made by the experts.

Here's but one tiny example that jumped off the page of your "pretty good summation of the climate controversy":
To defend the hypothesis of strong positive climate feedback, global warming supporters must posit that there are exogenous climate effects that are in fact holding down the increase due to CO2. Thus has been born the theory of man-made sulfate aerosols, basically pollution from burning dirty fuels, that is keeping the Earth cool. When the rest of the world gets around to reducing these emissions as has the US, the theory goes, then we will see rapid catch-up warming. Skeptics point out that no one really has any idea of the magnitude of the cooling from these aerosols, and that, ironically, every global warming model just happens to assume exactly the amount of cooling from these aerosols that is needed to make their models match history. Skeptics call this their “plug variable.”
Sounds good, right? Except the author, in more than one place insinuates that the models are based on mere "theories" with little or no supporting evidence.
Except of course for this direct evidence of the cooling effects of "dirty pollutants" presented here:

I read yours now you read mine.

DAVID TRAVIS: The 9/11 study showed that if you remove a contributor to global dimming, jet contrails, just for a three-day period, we see an immediate response of the surface temperature. Do the same thing globally, we might see a large-scale increase in global warming.

NARRATOR: This is the crux of the problem. While the greenhouse effect has been warming the planet, it now seems global dimming has been cooling it down.

This new understanding is something that climate modelers like Peter Cox have to contend with.

DOCTOR PETER COX (University of Exeter): Climate change, to the current date, appears to have been a tug of war, really, between two manmade pollutants. On the one side, we've got greenhouse gases that are pulling the system towards a warmer state, on the other hand, we've got particles from pollution that are cooling it down. And there's a kind of tug of war going on between the two, in which the middle of the rope, if you like, determines where the climate system is going in terms of warming or cooling.
This "theory" is not just supported by evidence gathered during the no-fly days following 9/11, but by decades of data gathered in Russia, Australia, Germany and Israel, to name a few:
MICHAEL RODERICK: And then one day, just by accident, I had to go to the library to get an article out of Nature. And, as you do, I couldn't find it, and I just glanced at a...through the thing, and there was an article called "Evaporation Losing Its Strength," which reported a decline in pan evaporation over Russia, the United States and Eastern Europe.

And there, in the measurements, they said that the pans had, on average, evaporated about a hundred millimeters less of water in the last 30 years.

NARRATOR: Mike knew how much sunlight was needed to evaporate a millimeter of water, so he put the two sets of figures together, the drop in evaporation with the drop in sunlight.

MICHAEL RODERICK: So you just do the sum in your head: a hundred millimeters of water, less a pan evaporation, two and a half mega joules, so two and a half times a hundred is two hundred and fifty mega joules. And that was, in fact, what the Russians had measured with the decline in sunlight in the last 30 years. It was quite amazing.
And a study done in the Maldives:
The Maldives seem unpolluted, but in fact the northern islands sit in a stream of dirty air descending from India. Only the southern tip of the long island chain enjoys clean air, coming all the way from Antarctica.

So, by comparing the northern islands with the southern ones, Ramanathan and his colleagues would be able to see exactly what difference the pollution made to the atmosphere and the sunlight.

Project INDOEX, as it was called, was a huge multinational effort. For four years, every possible technique was used to sample and monitor the atmosphere over the Maldives. INDOEX cost $25,000,000, but it produced results; and they surprised everyone.

VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN: The stunning part of the experiment was this pollutant layer, which was three kilometers thick, cut down the sunlight reaching the ocean by more than 10 percent.
All this is just from one miniscule, glossed over assumption by your hero. There are many more holes that could be shot in his analysis, demonstrating that this subject is beyond your scope, and his, and definitely beyond my inclination to waste my time pointing them out, as this or any other information that contradicts your need to trivialize the research will clearly never make a dent in your commitment to the climate-science-conspiracy theory.
"God is a metaphor for that which trancends all levels of intellectual thought. It's as simple as that." J. Campbell

Last edited by handle; 02-09-2012 at 06:04 PM..
Reply With Quote