Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hey Polar.....want to laugh your balls off......found a vid of Abe shooting a 50 cal round. Like everything else, he's doing it wrong!!!
Guy hit in head with .50 caliber ricochet - YouTube
I hate to disappoint you, but I find this neither humorous nor intimidating. It makes me curious however. Why do you think I deserve this level of abuse?
My guess is that he`ll seek shelter in his usual 97 % "skepticalscinence.org" turtle shellCHAMPAIGN, Ill. -- Atmospheric measurements made at Earth's geographic poles provide a convenient way of validating and calibrating global circulation models. Such measurements also might provide some of the first conclusive evidence of global change in the middle and upper atmospheres. But new data shows that the current models are wrong: Temperatures over the South Pole are much colder in winter than scientists had anticipated.
Gardner's group was the first to make upper atmosphere temperature measurements over the South Pole. From December 1999 until October 2001, the scientists operated a laser radar (lidar) system at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. By combining the lidar data with balloon measurements of the troposphere and lower stratosphere, the scientists recorded temperatures from the surface to an altitude of about 70 miles.
"Our results suggest that wintertime warming due to sinking air masses is not as strong as the models have assumed," Gardner said. "But, in all fairness, since no one had made these measurements before, modelers have been forced to estimate the values. And, in this case, their estimates were wrong."
"Current global circulation models apparently overpredict the amount of down-welling, because they show warmer temperatures than we observed," Gardner said.
LOL Polar.......97% FTMFL right here >>>>
Report: DC's green-approved buildings using more energy | The Daily Caller
But while it understands the risks, the D.C. government continues to mandate the ratings for public buildings and get cash from the program.
The city has collected $5.2 million in permit fees from the program since 2010.
Read more: Report: DC's green-approved buildings using more energy | The Daily Caller
LOL Polar.......97% FTMFL right here >>>>
Report: DC's green-approved buildings using more energy | The Daily Caller
Henny Penny, also known as Chicken Licken or Chicken Little, is a folk tale with a moral in the form of a cumulative tale about a chicken who believes the world is coming to an end. The phrase "The sky is falling!" features prominently in the story, and has passed into the English language as a common idiom indicating a hysterical or mistaken belief that disaster is imminent.
The amount of IR "back radiation" which can be solely attributed to CO2 is miniscule.[FONT=Arial, Geneva][SIZE=+4]The Climate Catastrophe
[/SIZE][SIZE=+3]- A Spectroscopic Artifact?[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva]by [SIZE=+1]Dr. Heinz Hug[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva]Crucial is the relative increment of greenhouse effect . This is equal to the difference between the sum of slope integrals for 714 and 357 ppm, related to the total integral for 357 ppm. Considering the n[SIZE=-2]3[/SIZE] band alone (as IPCC does) we get[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva](9.79[SIZE=+1]*[/SIZE]10[SIZE=-2]-4[/SIZE] cm[SIZE=-2]-1[/SIZE] - 1.11[SIZE=+1]*[/SIZE]10[SIZE=-2]-4[/SIZE] cm[SIZE=-2]-1[/SIZE]) / 0.5171 cm[SIZE=-2]-1[/SIZE] = 0.17 %[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva] Conclusions[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva]It is hardly to be expected that for CO[SIZE=-2]2[/SIZE] doubling an increment of IR absorption at the 15 µm edges by 0.17% can cause any significant global warming or even a climate catastrophe.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva]The radiative forcing for doubling can be calculated by using this figure. If we allocate an absorption of 32 W/m[SIZE=-2]2[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1][14][/SIZE] over 180º steradiant to the total integral (area) of the n[SIZE=-2]3[/SIZE] band as observed from satellite measurements [SIZE=-1](Hanel et al., 1971)[/SIZE] and applied to a standard atmosphere, and take an increment of 0.17%, the absorption is 0.054 W/m[SIZE=-2]2[/SIZE] - and not 4.3 W/m[SIZE=-2]2[/SIZE].[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva]This is roughly 80 times less than IPCC's radiative forcing.[/FONT]
The Climate Chicken Littles like to cite their "radiative imbalance" which they say is caused by the greenhouse gas effect with just 10 meters of air & CO2, but always lump it with water vapor as "total greenhouse gas effect" in W/m^2 and never CO2 by itself, which would then have to be in Watts per m^2 and per µm....not just watts/m^2
The only part of the spectrum that matters if CO2 is the culprit would be the 15 µm band....and that`s the problem which is being glossed over.
CO2 is in fact the predominant IR absorbing gas at that particular wavelength, but it also does not care from where the IR came from and absorbs as much 15 µm IR coming from the sun and preventing it to warm the ground as it does to 1/2 of the 15 µm IR the ground radiates up.
So the question is, does a 288 deg K object radiate more IR at that wavelength than the sun radiates down at 5800 deg K.
And the answer is of course not...
So if the CO2 absorption "radiative imbalance" is cancelled out at that particular (15 µm) band, why is there a "greenhouse gas effect" at all?
It is a fact that SW light which does reach the ground through all that CO2 and is not reflected is down-converted to LW.
..which is then partially absorbed by the entire mixture of "green house gasses":
To which I reply f@<& that,.... show me the CO2 specific watts per m^2 per µm for the CO2 without lumping it with water vapor as a "greenhouse gas" effect in watts per m^2.
It`s not as if that could not be measured...and it has been:
The amount of IR "back radiation" which can be solely attributed to CO2 is miniscule.[FONT=Arial, Geneva][SIZE=+4]The Climate Catastrophe
[/SIZE][SIZE=+3]- A Spectroscopic Artifact?[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva]by [SIZE=+1]Dr. Heinz Hug[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva]Crucial is the relative increment of greenhouse effect . This is equal to the difference between the sum of slope integrals for 714 and 357 ppm, related to the total integral for 357 ppm. Considering the n[SIZE=-2]3[/SIZE] band alone (as IPCC does) we get[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva](9.79[SIZE=+1]*[/SIZE]10[SIZE=-2]-4[/SIZE] cm[SIZE=-2]-1[/SIZE] - 1.11[SIZE=+1]*[/SIZE]10[SIZE=-2]-4[/SIZE] cm[SIZE=-2]-1[/SIZE]) / 0.5171 cm[SIZE=-2]-1[/SIZE] = 0.17 %[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva] Conclusions[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva]It is hardly to be expected that for CO[SIZE=-2]2[/SIZE] doubling an increment of IR absorption at the 15 µm edges by 0.17% can cause any significant global warming or even a climate catastrophe.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva]The radiative forcing for doubling can be calculated by using this figure. If we allocate an absorption of 32 W/m[SIZE=-2]2[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1][14][/SIZE] over 180º steradiant to the total integral (area) of the n[SIZE=-2]3[/SIZE] band as observed from satellite measurements [SIZE=-1](Hanel et al., 1971)[/SIZE] and applied to a standard atmosphere, and take an increment of 0.17%, the absorption is 0.054 W/m[SIZE=-2]2[/SIZE] - and not 4.3 W/m[SIZE=-2]2[/SIZE].[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Geneva]This is roughly 80 times less than IPCC's radiative forcing.[/FONT]
The guys that got hosed by that Apache pilot, who had no trouble seeing their body-IR through a mile of air with 380 ppm CO2 found out the hard way that this thin 15 µm CO2 band offered no more shielding than a hydro-wire does during a down pour
I'm not going to wade through 2000+ replies on this topic, but will say this.
This we do know:
Glaciers worldwide are dwindling/disappearing.
The polar ice cap is indeed melting and nations oil companies are rushing to cash in on that.
Drought and forest fires are on the increase.
So, my stance?
Big deal. Forget about it. Humans are nothing more than parasites on the planet anyway. Over the next few hundred years we'll get slowly roasted out of existence and good riddance. Hopefully, something better will come along.
And not one AGW cultists has been able to prove even one link that has datasets with source that proves CO2 controls climate.
Sick a black mans dick, you effin piece of shit!
