Register to Comment
Page 993 of 6522 FirstFirst ... 49389394398399199299399499510031043109314931993 ... LastLast
Results 9,921 to 9,930 of 65215
Like Tree13863Likes
  1. #9921
    miclin miclin is offline
    miclin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    94

    Great news! Greens hold the balance of power in both the Australian house of reps and the senate. Carbon tax was hugely divisive with about 50-50 split of public opinion.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #9922
    Tombo Tombo is offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    7,251

    Quote Originally Posted by miclin View Post
    Great news! Greens hold the balance of power in both the Australian house of reps and the senate. Carbon tax was hugely divisive with about 50-50 split of public opinion.
    That is exactly how Watermelons want to act the world over and enforce their unpopular personal ambitions on others. Exactly the same as our own experience.

    A tiny mandate wielding control.


    Watermelons have a dangerous deficiency in democratic beliefs.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #9923
    Cassandra Syndrome Cassandra Syndrome is offline
    Cassandra Syndrome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    24,808

    Quote Originally Posted by owedtojoy View Post
    Panel 2 of the top of the strip just about sums up rash, CS and Ultan.
    This here simple cartoon sums up you and Sir Charles. I leave the which one is which as the challenge for the day for the 6 viewers of this parody of a thread.

    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #9924
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    37,552

    Quote Originally Posted by miclin View Post
    Great news! Greens hold the balance of power in both the Australian house of reps and the senate. Carbon tax was hugely divisive with about 50-50 split of public opinion.
    Climate change denial had a huge advantage in one area - the media. Most of the newspapers are Murdoch-owned, and the Australian (supposed to be the country's "quality" newspaper) has waged a long anti-science campaign. Besides that, there are huge mining and agricultural interests with a lot to lose financially who poured plenty of money into the anti-carbon-tax campaign.

    Many Australians are wise to Murdoch phone-hacking, computer-hacking and slanted reporting, but the media probably accounted for the even split in public opinion. Congratulations to Julia Gillard and her supporters for having the gumption to stand up to Murdoch and the mining interests. There are many in US and UK politics who would not have the guts - guess it takes an Aussie.

    PS The irony about the split in opinion is that the Liberals (Tories, really) jettisoned carbon-tax supporter Malcolm Turnbull (by a single vote!) in favour of scientifically challenged Tony Abbott, a complete blockhead. The Liberals won marginally more seats in the election, but Abbott was completely inept in dealing with the Independents and the single Green who was elected (for the first time in Australia). Gillard was skillful enough to bargain support for her Government, which looks set to last until the next election.
    Last edited by owedtojoy; 8th November 2011 at 08:23 PM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #9925
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    37,552

    Quote Originally Posted by owedtojoy View Post
    I posted the above last year, and it is still true. I added the extent of June 2011 Eurasian snow pack, and the melt. The 2011 snow melt was the second biggest ever, and the June snow extent was the lowest ever.



    Note there are now 8 successive June points below the median - a probabliity of 1/256. Quite rare to happen by chance alone.

    Even rarer if there was "global cooling". But, if you want to continue with that fantasy, be my guest.
    And here's another thing - this page in Wikipedia contains a list of temperature records by country - 75 cold and 86 hot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_weather_records

    Check which decade has the most high temperature records - well it's 2001 to 2010 in which 39 hot records were made, as opposed to 5 cold. And of those 39, 20 were set in 2010 alone.



    Global warming has ended? Not bloody likely.
    Last edited by owedtojoy; 8th November 2011 at 08:59 PM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #9926
    SirCharles SirCharles is offline
    SirCharles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    16,369

    Quote Originally Posted by Ultan Murphy View Post
    It's the Sun stupid was the message.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #9927
    SirCharles SirCharles is offline
    SirCharles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    16,369

    Prepared for the 2nd part?

    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #9928
    SirCharles SirCharles is offline
    SirCharles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    16,369

    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #9929
    SirCharles SirCharles is offline
    SirCharles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    16,369

    Let's move on from the childish debate about whether there would be "global cooling" or not to mitigation of humanmade global warming.

    Here Comes the Solar Skyscraper


    November 8, 2011



    Scientific American:


    Plants have been using a green pigment for billions of years to capture sunlight, turning it into a flow of electrons and storing its energy in the chemical bonds of big organic molecules (also known as food). Given that successful history, chemist Michael Graetzel of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne and his colleagues turned to a compound similar in shape and color to chlorophyll when they set out to build a better solar cell.

    Graetzel’s work could be the precursor to tinted windows that also produce electricity—an advance that could lead to entire buildings generating power, rather than just the rooftops. In a paper in the November 4 issue of Science, Graetzel and his colleagues outline how they took two big steps to making such dye-sensitized solar cells more common in the marketplace: They improved efficiency and lowered the cost of the cells.

    …the new cell can convert slightly more than 12 percent of the sunlight in the visible spectrum it absorbs into electrical current at a higher voltage than previous such cells. With tweaks to the dyes to help them absorb infrared light, the researchers suggest they may achieve efficiencies of 15 percent. That draws closer tosolar cells made from highly purified silicon that can convert roughly 20 percent of incoming sunlight.

    “[The] key benefits are light weight and flexibility as well as transparency and multicolor options for building-integrated photovoltaic glass panels,” argued the team of researchers in an e-mail to Scientific American (think: color-tinted glass in windows that also produces electricity). “The new cells will be produced ultimately at significantly lower cost than conventional devices.

    ..such solar cells work better in weak light—like plants that thrive in the diffuse light of a cloudy day or in the shade of a forest—where they can efficiently absorb much more of the incoming sunlight than other photovoltaics. That means the dye-sensitive design may find a use where and when sunlight is not as intense. “They may not do as well at noon,” says materials scientist Michael McGehee of Stanford University, but “they can perform better earlier and later in the day. For that reason, the gap in performance isn’t as large as it may seem.”
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #9930
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    37,552

    Quote Originally Posted by SirCharles View Post
    There are two types of "global cooling" dogmas out there, and it is important to distinguish between them.

    (1) A variety of dogmatic statements like "Global warming stopped in 1998", "The world stopped warming in 1998 (or in 200, 2001 or 2003)", and "The world has been cooling since 1998 etc". The last one is not quite the same as the other two, but dogmatic deniers do not care.

    None of these statements are scientifically supportable. The BEST dataset of temperature stations (the most accurate data masurements, according to its practitioners) does not show a static situation. Other datasets show a reduced rate of warming. It is best to remember that the 13-year period under discussion is too short to draw firm conclusions.

    Besides, if Ireland had a 28C summer's day, and then a drop to 27C the following the day, the statement "It is cooler than yesterday" would be accurate but misleading. "It is relatively cooler than yesterday" would be more accurate on a very hot summer's day by our standards. But anyone who said ""It is cooler than yesterday, therefore it will snow tomorrow" would be considered insane.

    (2) However, the absolute coolists believe just that - that we are entering a period of pronounced cold. The world will enter, according to them, another Maunder minimum which will wipe out the 0.5C average global rise since the end of the little ice age, and (somehow, there are no scientific grounds for this) the approximately 1C rise due to global warming. Apparently, the impending minimum in sun spots is responsible for this.

    There are very poor grounds for this belief - there is a theory of local harsh winters in Europe due to a diminution of u-v light from the sun. Other theories for this have been advanced, but the scientific jury is still out. Even if there was a Maunder Minimum, it would be only temporary and would not reverse global warming, only delay or slightly mitigate it.

    There is no scientific evidence for this belief, whatsoever. Strangely enough, it is even more a catastrophist belief than global warming is, but its proponents are never accused of "alarmism"!

    Here is Don Easterbrook, global cooling predictor, in 2008:

    Don Easterbrook’s AGU paper on potential global cooling | Watts Up With That?

    The IPCC predicted global warming of 0.6° C (1° F) by 2011 and 1.2° C (2° F) by 2038, whereas Easterbrook (2001) predicted the beginning of global cooling by 2007 (± 3-5 yrs) and cooling of about 0.3-0.5° C until ~2035. The predicted cooling seems to have already begun. Recent measurements of global temperatures suggest a gradual cooling trend since 1998 and 2007-2008 was a year of sharp global cooling. The cooling trend will likely continue as the sun enters a cycle of lower irradiance and the Pacific Ocean changed from its warm mode to its cool mode.
    Rubbish. 2010 was a record year in NASA & NOAA data, and a tie for record top in the satellite UAH data.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment