Article on Global Warming: Human Created CO2 not the cause...

[NaptownKnight]

http://www.nov55.com/gbwm.html


So, a question to the more Scientifically gifted, how true is this article? If it is, it's groundbreaking, Humans couldn't possibly cause Global Warming. And what about the ice age?

[christof139]

Oh yes, this has been suggested for years; that the earth first warms, then as the great ice sheets melt the cold melt water flows into the warm seas and the seas cool and then the continents begin to cool again and ice and snow begin to build up again for a new ice age. Something like that. There have been many ice ages throughout geologic time.

Seems that recent evidence is suggesting that long periods of increased and intensive solar flare activity provides the heat for global warming, and this is cyclic in nature are as ice ages. There are particles in the solar flare plasma that actually travel into and then through and out the other side of earth, and this is proven.

I am rusty on this and not an expert, but it all makes sense. I am a defunct/semi-retired geologist that didn't finish my masters but oh well. Much good info. is available on the inet.

Chris

[Spurius]

Humans couldn't possibly cause Global Warming.

Thank God, now we only have to worry about the rising temperatures.

[HansDuet]

Climate has always changed. Isnt it suppose to be iceage coming next?
I prefer it warm.

[Juvenal]

http://www.nov55.com/gbwm.html So, a question to the more Scientifically gifted, how true is this article? ...

This article is very sure of itself indeed - all of the statements are flat assertions of what we are told is fact.

My own limited understanding of the scientific method is that all conclusions are provisional and subject to testing and possible refutation. I don't think I am qualified to refute any of this - but the tone worries me.

I had a look around on the site to see if it had a theme. I found a fascinating set of assertions under the "Science is Broken" section (http://www.nov55.com/ovr.html), here are some quotes.

Standards in science are continuously deteriorating resulting in more junk science, and results are not meeting the needs of society.
The essence of junk science is to acquire meaningless numbers through vagaries and give them any meaning someone wants. Then basic principles which have evolved a clear meaning over many years are contradicted as if they were of no relevance in evaluating the new numbers.

and...

For specific examples, relativity is a closed loop of logic with an invalid starting point. It says the receiving point of light determines the velocity. Effect supposedly precedes cause. That logic is not valid anyplace.
Even earlier, the Michelson-Morley experiment created the need for relativity. It failed to find an etheric medium in space for conducting light waves. In fact, it failed to produce any result. A looked-for diffraction pattern did not appear. The absence of a result is not a valid basis for conclusions in science. Any number of explanations exist for the result.

So it would appear that it isn't just Global Warming that is wrong...

And finally, the truth about scientific peer review on page http://www.nov55.com/prv.html

Peer review is a form of censorship, which is tyranny over the mind. Censorship does not purify; it corrupts.

[NaptownKnight]

Hmmm... I didn't check around the site. Well it does seem fishy, but it's hard to deny some of the info they have. I don't know if I want to believe them, but it does sound right. I mean, is it true that Ice Ages come in exact 100,000 year intervals?

[Spurius]

I mean, is it true that Ice Ages come in exact 100,000 year intervals?

Roughly - if you chart it small, and walk to the other end of the room, it's more or less precisely 100K yrs. Close up, you could be standing there with your stopwatch all for nothing, for a few thousand years. Milankovitch cycles are not properly understood yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

That vid is not half bad BTW, saw that earlier.

[Lusted]

Yes Ice Ages do tend to happen ever so often, however the trends we are seeing now do not seem to indicate that an Ice Age is about to happen, more like the Earth is warming too much for one to happen.

[christof139]

Yes Ice Ages do tend to happen ever so often, however the trends we are seeing now do not seem to indicate that an Ice Age is about to happen, more like the Earth is warming too much for one to happen.

Could be, we don't know. Have to wait and see. Although if the warming is irreverseible all those people living in low-lying coastal areas will have to move inland, thu s creting a housing constrution boom. Palm trees around the southern Great Lakes Region would be OK. Plus, you could take your fishing/pleasure boat and cruise around and fish in the drowned cities, maybe do some diving for valuable artifacts, and expore the higher and unflooded levels of large skyscarpers, and dive from them into the water kerspalsh. Magic Mystery tours with glass bottomed boats using the streets of the city as cruise routes. Interesting.

Chris

[MattErickson]

Yes Ice Ages do tend to happen ever so often, however the trends we are seeing now do not seem to indicate that an Ice Age is about to happen, more like the Earth is warming too much for one to happen.

I agree, about five years ago I used to have need a coat by the end of October. Now I can go without one until the middle of February. It doesn't even snow on Christmas anymore!

[NaptownKnight]

I agree, about five years ago I used to have need a coat by the end of October. Now I can go without one until the middle of February. It doesn't even snow on Christmas anymore!

Well supposedly it must get real hot before an Ice Age can begin. Question, even if Global Warming is human caused wouldn't it result in an ice age anyways?

[David Deas]

What the author writes of the theory of Relativity has shown me that the only thing broken is his opinion of science to begin with. We have been able to produce some pretty impressive computer models of global warming that have agreed remarkably with observation.

[Justice and Mercy]

What the author writes of the theory of Relativity has shown me that the only thing broken is his opinion of science to begin with. We have been able to produce some pretty impressive computer models of global warming that have agreed remarkably with observation.

You mean the same models that failed to predict past events accurately?

Look, let's keep this out of politics, and let the scientists do their jobs.

[Simetrical]

Look, let's keep this out of politics, and let the scientists do their jobs.

Sure, but first we have to decide who the scientists are.

[Justice and Mercy]

Sure, but first we have to decide who the scientists are.

That wouldn't be a problem if the Chicken Littles stopped clamoring, just for a little while.

Wouldn't it be pretty simple to stop global warming? Build a giant mirror in space. BAM!

[rathelios]

Climate models have to include a large number of variables and have never accurately predicted anything up to now. They require constant realignment with the reality of what has actually happened. This is because they are complicated mathematical computer models. The scientific method is not broken but it works best changing just one variable at a time. Sometimes it is difficult to take into account lots of variables at once especially in a predictive way.

I blame those sodding south american butterflies and their infernal hurricane causing wing flapping myself.

[ajm317]

So, a question to the more Scientifically gifted, how true is this article? If it is, it's groundbreaking, Humans couldn't possibly cause Global Warming. And what about the ice age?

The guy is a total quack. A quick look at his "calculations" for example displays a complete inability to distinguish between the concepts of heat and temperature. When he then goes on to talk about night vision, well, don't take him too seriously.

EDIT:

This part right here is pretty good for a laugh.

http://www.nov55.com/ener.html

[Spurius]

Yep, it's a bit of a shame, because the original point has its merits (again, see the video, it has a whole crowd of scientists making very clear statements) - but he makes numerous claims in totally non-related fields, that don't exactly come across as made by someone with a full deck.

[Lusted]

Well interesting for the Northern part of the world maybe, but for Africa, India and China rthe predicted temperature rises could spell disaster.

[christof139]

Possibly, but that will help the air-conditioning and deslinization industries, and many plants will thrive, including some crops unless severe droughts are prevalent but then again the amount of rainfall may increase in the south.

It's unknown.

Chris