liters to grams Usenet Seance: The Ghost of Joe Fischer's long dead brain still speaks from the "other side". (1 viewing) (1) Guests
Favoured: 0
|
|
|
TOPIC: liters to grams Usenet Seance: The Ghost of Joe Fischer's long dead brain still speaks from the "other side".
|
|
|
|
liters to grams Usenet Seance: The Ghost of Joe Fischer's long dead brain still speaks from the "other side".
|
|
|
On 29 Mar 2007 17:47:35 -0700,
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
snipped the references I gave, Of course. Why, they were the 2001 and 2007 International Panel on Climate Change preliminary Summary for Policy Makers in html format instead of PDF. And I wrote; I have to guess, Why? There is a lot of work published on the subject, so why guess? Try reading my previous explanation and check the table I mentioned on Page 7 of the 2007 report. When the estimated accuracy is a larger number than the data, it isn't very accurate data . What is an SPM? Summary for Policy Makers, the bible of AGW. Joe Fischer Joe, Maybe you can be an Advisor for Denialist Fred Singer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
liters to grams Usenet Seance: The Ghost of Joe Fischer's long dead brain still speaks from the "other side".
|
|
|
I have to guess, Why? There is a lot of work published on the subject, so why guess? Try reading my previous explanation and check the table I mentioned on Page 7 of the 2007 report. When the estimated accuracy is a larger number than the data, it isn't very accurate data . What is an SPM? Summary for Policy Makers, the bible of AGW. The IPCC process gives a snap shot of the latest scientific research on climate change. The main documents are at best a summary. Also produced is a less detailed document, the Summary for Policy Makers. The SPM was presented to the public before the main Working Group 1 report, which is due out sometime in May. The SPM is NOT the bible , it's the same as a Classic Comic version of a novel (if those are still available these days). If you want the best INTRODUCTION to the science, you need to read the whole WG 1 report, which might be likened to Reader's Digest. If you really want to understand the science, you need to go back and read thru the large batch of reports listed in the references. I suggest that you (and Joe) start by reading the TAR, WG 1, so you will be able to understand the newer findings in AR 4 when it's released in final form.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
liters to grams Usenet Seance: The Ghost of Joe Fischer's long dead brain still speaks from the "other side".
|
|
|
or internationally has done all those things. Apparently you missed most of the discussion about heat content capacity of the entire atmosphere only being equal to 3.5 meters of ocean. Joe Fischer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
liters to grams Usenet Seance: The Ghost of Joe Fischer's long dead brain still speaks from the "other side".
|
|
|
and file AGW non-scientist are just fairy tales, there is a specific process by which CO2 has to absorb energy from two narrow bandwidths, and re-radiate it in some possibly wider bandwidths. And time is needed to emit that energy before it is shared in collisions with O2 and N2. It is time to put that process down on paper in black and white, rather than to reference a paper 110 years old, or others even older. Most knowledge about thermal energy and electromagnetic radiation attenuation was developed after 1900, there were few personal radios before WWI and few TVs before WWII. I have been looking for good papers on the properties of CO2, maybe there are a lot not available on the internet for free, but I haven't found any that really get down to specifics. The more specific papers can be, the less scepticism there will be. The 2007 IPCC SPM table on Page 7 is not specific at all about the change in mass of the Antarctic ice sheet for the past 30 years, how can it be specific about the next 100? Joe Fischer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
liters to grams Usenet Seance: The Ghost of Joe Fischer's long dead brain still speaks from the "other side".
|
|
|
The evidence that the increased concentration of CO2 is caused by humans is said to be _base_d on isotopic composition but there is no reference in IPPC3 . Can someone give me more details on this? No details exist. Really! Are you claiming that there is no published research showing that the measured increased CO2 is caused by human activity. Well, no. But there's really no way of knowing tha the levels wouldn't be the same regardless of human involvement. (And it's irrelevant anyways since CO2 has no effect on global mean temperature.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
liters to grams Usenet Seance: The Ghost of Joe Fischer's long dead brain still speaks from the "other side".
|
|
|
Princeton is already discredited as a haven for the hand-on manager of the organized crime racketeering operation boss Mickey Edwards, who personally helped create the racketeering-_style_ science crime frauds practiced by the Global Warming Denial Industry. I have no relationship with Edwards and I know nothing of the activities you refer to which certainly have nothing to do with the science discussed here so I have deleted that material.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access. |
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
