Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

Scientist may have lied

  • Thread starter Thread starter lartinos
  • Start date Start date
yea i think cellulosic is great. i know plants were having a lot of trouble getting off the ground due to issues with financing, but the DOE loan guarantee for the POET plant should be an amazing leap

Cellulosic technology will eventually happen. It may take two more years and it may take 20 more. But once it does, we'd have a carbon neutral approach that could be used indefinitely.

But again, it's not sexy enough for Americans. We're obsesses with something that's whiz-bang, but that product is doomed to fail because your average working guy isn't going to bet the farm on a car that might not have the plug he needs in 5 years.
 
where did you get this information from?

It was in bits & pieces; starting from the first report on KTLA TV news, and then when my wife and I did daily searches for local news on it. As I said, any pages with any details other than "student accidentally drowned while walking his GF's dog", were removed from the Internet. CSULB no longer has an environmental sciences department as of last year, and I have no idea why, or if it has anything to do with that story.

If suddenly there's no more kx250rider on EF, and there's a story about "Ventura County farmer killed by falling Hass avocado, wife to undergo lobotomy in morning", then I will have become part of the coverup for opening my big Irish mouth too much, LOL...

Charles
 
NASA Study Shatters Climate Alarmists’ Assumptions - By Mario Loyola - Planet Gore - National Review Online

“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”

Not only does the atmosphere release more energy than previously thought, it starts releasing it earlier in a warming cycle. The models forecast that the climate should continue to absorb solar energy until a warming event peaks.

Instead, the satellite data shows the climate system starting to shed energy more than three months before the typical warming event reaches its peak.

“At the peak, satellites show energy being lost while climate models show energy still being gained,” Spencer said.

This is the first time scientists have looked at radiative balances during the months before and after these transient temperature peaks.

Applied to long-term climate change, the research might indicate that the climate is less sensitive to warming due to increased carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere than climate modelers have theorized. A major underpinning of global warming theory is that the slight warming caused by enhanced greenhouse gases should change cloud cover in ways that cause additional warming, which would be a positive feedback cycle.

Instead, the natural ebb and flow of clouds, solar radiation, heat rising from the oceans and a myriad of other factors added to the different time lags in which they impact the atmosphere might make it impossible to isolate or accurately identify which piece of Earth’s changing climate is feedback from manmade greenhouse gases.

“There are simply too many variables to reliably gauge the right number for that,” Spencer said.

I've been criticizing the climate computer models for years...just sayin.

This is new data people! Jesus Mary and Joseph...
 
This is new data people! Jesus Mary and Joseph...

do they have predictions of their own? isn't warming still going to occur if atmospheric CO2 concentrations increase? are they saying warming but not as severe, or are they saying throw everything out the window completely?
 
do they have predictions of their own? isn't warming still going to occur if atmospheric CO2 concentrations increase? are they saying warming but not as severe, or are they saying throw everything out the window completely?

The new data indicates the cloud cover is changing to release more heat as opposed to the Al Gore model that predicted cloud cover fueled by CO2 would cause more heat to be retained.

Basically, global warming will not have the catastrophic impacts the media and politicians have predicted.
 
The new data indicates the cloud cover is changing to release more heat as opposed to the Al Gore model that predicted cloud cover fueled by CO2 would cause more heat to be retained.

Basically, global warming will not have the catastrophic impacts the media and politicians have predicted.

I wont hold my breath waiting for this to hit the front page of the NYT and the 6 oclock news.
 
The new data indicates the cloud cover is changing to release more heat as opposed to the Al Gore model that predicted cloud cover fueled by CO2 would cause more heat to be retained.

Basically, global warming will not have the catastrophic impacts the media and politicians have predicted.

climate is still going to warm as atmospheric concentrations of CO2 increase though right?
 
climate is still going to warm as atmospheric concentrations of CO2 increase though right?

They don't argue that higher CO2 wouldn't cause warming, but NASA satellites have now shown that energy is radiated out of the atmosphere sooner as well as faster than any of the existing models predicted.

My personal take on the article is it appears the atmospheric temperature is less sensitive to CO2 concentration than others previously thought.
 
Top Bottom