![richard deliberty phototime richard deliberty phototime](https://cache.legacy.net/legacy/images/cobrands/pennlive/photos/0007911074-01-1_20161106.jpg)
The fact that “There are hundreds of peer reviewed papers on atmospherics – clouds and water vapour” has nothing to say about the truthiness of the two points raised by sophocles and is a Non Sequitur Was it point or point that you claim not to be true? There are hundreds of peer reviewed papers on atmospherics – clouds and water vapour. The CLOUD experiment at the Large Hadron Collider (CERN) in 2010Īdded heavywieght independant experimental confirmation of Svenmark’s hypothesis. Varies seasonally and in other ways with no apparent rhyme or reason.īut, it surely is not “constant” as the models assume.Īnd Christenson, Svensmark and Marsh showed the Cosmic RayĬonnection with clouds over a decade ago with some early support from The weather satellites will soon show this is not the case-the cloud cover The computer models do not do clouds at all.
![richard deliberty phototime richard deliberty phototime](http://www.jackdevine.us/BTCR/Border-Terriers/a_Wags.jpg)
The tipping point is just that much closer. Patrick Moore is one of those people who has earned respect from an influential crowd. But ultimately we know that bit by bit, word is getting around that there are serious flaws in the doomsday predictions. Because the press didn’t understand the mechanism, the commentators explain it all with other reasons. Usually it’s invisible, in that the mainstream press doesn’t report the message spreading, though it does report the outcomes - the policy reversals, the skeptical candidates, the falling carbon markets. Silently the message is reaching the layer of intelligent movers and shakers that get things done. Sometimes people ask in comments if we are making any difference and I tell them we are. There are only 2 possible explanations for, either there is some equally powerful natural factor that is suppressing the warming that should be caused by CO2, or CO2 is only a minor contributor to warming in the first place.” The global average temperature has now been flat for the past 15 years, as all the while CO2 emissions have continued to increase. Whereas if there was a negative feedback of 0.5 times then the temperature would only rise 0.5C. This is why the warming predicted by the models is so large. So if a certain increase in CO2 would theoretically cause a 1.0C increase in temperature, then if water caused a 3-4 times positive feedback the temperature would actually increase by 3-4C. It all depends on how much, and a t what altitudes, latitudes and times of day that water is in the form of a gas (vapour) or a liquid (clouds). Some scientists believe increased water will have a negative feedback instead, due to increased cloud cover. Many scientists do not agree with this, or do not agree that we know enough about the impact of increased water to predict the outcome. All of the models used by the IPCC assume that this increase in water vapour will result in a positive feedback in the order of 3-4 times the increase in temperature that would be caused by the increase in CO2 alone. It is generally accepted that a warmer climate will result in more water evaporating from the land and sea and therefore resulting in a higher level of water in the atmosphere, partly because the warmer the air is the more water it can hold. The fundamental dispute is about water in the atmosphere, either in the form of water vapour (a gas) or clouds (water in liquid form). “What most people don’t realize, partly because the media never explains it, is that there is no dispute over whether CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and all else being equal would result in a warming of the climate. Get Laughs, Get Attention, Get Your Message Across.The Wong Fielding Meeting on Global Warming - Documents.Odour reduction practices at Narrogin Beef Producers.Western Australian State Government email list.Australian Elected Representatives – Emails and phones.Thermometer selection (mystery loss of data).The 800 year lag in CO2 after temperature – graphed.ClimateGate: Thirty Years in the Making (Edition 1.1).The evidence that AGW fans need to provide.You can become a member, create a memorial, submit data, add flowers, add photos and search our database at no charge. Sysoon also contains listings for thousands of celebrity graves, making it the premier online destination for tombstone tourists. You can even leave 'virtual flowers' on the memorials you visit to complete the online cemetery experience. Sysoon memorials are rich with content, including dates, photos and bios. With millions of names, it's an invaluable tool for genealogists and history buffs.
#Richard deliberty phototime free
Sysoon is a free resource for finding the final resting places of famous folks, friends and family members. Find a grave Wish you knew where Richard Nixon was buried? How about your great-grandfather?