[LINK] O/T - Weather Patterns, Global Warming, Particulate Emissions.

[Rachel Polanskis]

I fear, should we get an Abbott govt, Plimer Science will become mandatory in the school
sector to attain funding, as has happened in some ALEC infested school councils in the US,  where they have declared climate change science to be pretty much like evolution and "alternate" 
viewpoints taught instead....   brrrrrr.....


rachel

--
rachel polanskis 
<r.polanskis at uws.edu.au> 
<grove at zeta.org.au>

On 08/05/2012, at 15:50, jim birch <planetjim at gmail.com> wrote:

> TKoltai <tomk at unwired.com.au> wrote:
> 
>> Particulate matter in the atmosphere increases health problems,
>> decreases lifespan, blocks out the sun and is just all round yucky
>> 
> 
> If we decrease the particulate pollution problem, which improved health,
> AGW gets worse not better.
> 
> Dimming wasn't invented recently.  It has been around in atmospheric
> science for a long time and there's been a lot of work to estimate the
> magnitude of it's effect.  According to the consensus of actual climate
> scientists it is significant but not near big enough to counteract
> increasing CO2 concentration.  Several large volcanic eruptions over the
> last century that temporarily add massive amounts of particulate matter to
> the atmosphere been observed to cause downward pressure on the temperature
> record and provide another way to test estimates of the magnitude of
> dimming.  Artificial increase of particulates has been proposed as way of
> countering AGW.  Global warming over the last century is empirically
> verifiable from temperature records and is remarkably robust when the major
> "noise" effects of insolation variation, volcanic eruptions and ENSO are
> removed from the temperature record using multivariate correlation.
> Dimming has demonstrably failed to stop AGW though it will have attentuated
> it.
> 
> The TV program you mentioned has been discredited. Google it.  The idea
> that something is credible because it's been on TV is a joke, right?
> 
> 
> However, if you want to believe that the overwhelming majority of actual
> trained climate scientists are a bunch of idiots (or conspirators!) who
> have been gazumped by a handful of loud mavericks who have incidentally
> been demonstrated to be statistically incompetent, not understand basic
> physics, make stuff up, and in cases are unable to add and multiply numbers
> or even read accurately, then go right ahead.
> 
> 
> BTW (if anyone's still reading) a set of simple clear responses to Ian
> Plimer's "How to get expelled from school" climate questions can be found
> at the climatechange.gov.au site. I found this worth reading just to be
> reminded of the level of incompetence, fantasy, and/or dishonesty that
> exists in anti-AGW circles.
> 
> http://www.climatechange.gov.au/climate-change/understanding-climate-change/~/media/climate-change/prof-plimer-101-questions-response-pdf.pdf
> 
> source page:
> http://www.climatechange.gov.au/climate-change/understanding-climate-change/response-to-prof-plimer.aspx
> 
> Jim
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link