“Water vapour in our stratosphere can act as a very powerful greenhouse gas… water is a by-product of methane breakdown… water vapour arising from high-flying aircraft may be an important source of stratospheric water.”
At Greenhouse Gas Online we find information on greenhouse gases which disregards water vapour in an approach unencumbered with scientific principles.
Water vapour in our stratosphere can act as a very powerful greenhouse gas. The amounts of water vapour in our stratosphere are mainly controlled by the earths overall climate. However, some other significant sources exist.
As described in the methane section, water is a by-product of methane breakdown in the atmosphere. Additionally, the water vapour arising from high flying aircraft may be an important source of stratospheric water, particularly in the future with increased global air travel.
Ah, so that’s it. First, water vapour can be a powerful greenhouse gas, but only in the stratosphere. We must beware of stratospheric water vapour, which is created from the breakdown of methane and by flying aircraft.
Kids, don’t bring your homework to this site.
An unimaginable proposal
“As a result — and for reasons that remain unexplained — the waters of the Southern Ocean may have begun to release carbon dioxide.”
Scientific American makes the most illogical statement I’ve heard in a while.
If there’s no reason for this event, why would one propose it?
An event is proposed for which no cause can be imagined. The author proposes something he has no reason to believe — or proposes something but can’t imagine why. This is nuts. It’s not science. Continue Reading →
Global warming reason
“We’re not going to save the planet by putting our country out of business.”
UK Chancellor George Osborne finally displays some common sense in his address to the Tory conference, putting the cat among the Lib Dem pigeons as they squawk over the looming “slow-down” or “turn-around” in Britain’s over-ambitious emissions reduction programme.
Some seem truly to believe that huge new emissions-related expenses will improve industry, boost the economy, produce another golden age and evoke adulation from the populace. It must be really hard for them to keep finding new ways to state such an obvious fallacy.
I earnestly hope that this message, which applies as sensibly to New Zealand as to any country, is absorbed by all those agitating to reduce our industrial emissions, including the climate committee of our Royal Society, some senior climate scientists in public service, Nick Smith, John Key (who probably knows it already but avoids stating it in public), the Green Party, NZ Herald senior journalists, Greenpeace and Jim Salinger.
People at Hot Topic will, I trust, note this unexpected assertion from “the greenest-ever government in the UK” — although nobody could expect them yet to understand or absorb it.
“44% think food and drink would be safer if it had no carbon or CO2 in it.”
Let us pause for a moment and recognise the deep ignorance of our beloved brethren and sistren around the world. Please remember all those wonderful people force-fed the illogical propaganda of their green masters and who now believe the following seven impossible things before breakfast.
Of the Australian public, and no doubt our own “public”
- 93% think CO2 constitutes more than 1% of the atmosphere
- 53% believe climate change causes tsunamis
- 47% think CO2 is ‘pollution’
- 44% think food and drink would be safer if it had no carbon or CO2 in it
- 40% believe climate change causes earthquakes
- 37% believe climate change causes volcanic eruptions
- 37% think we should try to reduce carbon in the body
Nothing I might say could make it sound any better. But those people need your help…
“Not long ago, to question multiculturalism … risked being branded racist and pushed into the loathesome corner with paedophiles and climate change deniers.”
Michael Buerk, presenter of the BBC radio program the ‘Moral Maze’, said this on 9 February while introducing a debate about multiculturalism in the UK.
BBC iPlayer link (20 seconds in).
Michael Buerk has presented The Moral Maze, a lively ethical dilemma discussion forum, since it began in 1990. Since 1998 he has also presented The Choice, in which an individual explores how they coped with a personal dilemma. He presented The Ten O’Clock News and 999, both on BBC One. He began his journalistic career with the Thomson Newspaper group in 1967 and went on to work on The Daily Mail.
Michael joined the BBC in 1970. During his subsequent years as a foreign correspondent, which included a four-year posting to South Africa, he reported from 53 countries. He has won numerous awards including Radio Broadcaster of the Year, the Royal Television Society’s Journalist of the Year and the BAFTA News Award.
Michael has now also won the CCG Quote Of The Week! What a burk.
“And the urgency is that the longer we wait, the further down the pipeline climate travels and works its way into weather, and once it’s in the weather, it’s there for good.”
Said by Dr Heidi Cullen in testimony to the US House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment a few days ago (h/t WUWT).
This is from the CEO of Climate Central. She has strong credentials in climatology and weather forecasting. Her comment is surprising and deeply concerning because she should have a better understanding of the difference between weather and climate than this comment reveals. From her bio:
In addition to her responsibilities as interim CEO and Director of Communications, Dr. Heidi Cullen serves as a research scientist and correspondent for Climate Central. Dr. Cullen currently reports on climate for PBS NewsHour, Time.com and The Weather Channel. Before joining Climate Central, Dr. Cullen served as The Weather Channel’s first on-air climate expert and helped create Forecast Earth, the first weekly television series to focus on issues related to climate change and the environment. Prior to that Dr. Cullen worked as a research scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, CO.
This QOTW [Quote Of The Week] is from our friend and WUWT contributor Willis Eschenbach who writes:
I just got my 29 January 2010 copy of Science Magazine, which contains an interview with Rajendra K. Pachauri, the future ex-Chairman of the IPCC. In it, he gives the following astounding answer:
Q: Has all that has happened this winter dented the credibility of IPCC?
R.K.P.: I don’t think the credibility of the IPCC can be dented. If the IPCC wasn’t there, why would anyone be worried about climate change?
Why, indeed? …