From: Hachiroku ハチロク on
180,000,000 people in the US will be effected by arctic air this week,
with much lower than usual temperatures.

Oh, wait. I forgot what Clinton said: "And you need to realize, some
areas will be getting colder."

Um, FLORIDA?!?!?!?!

More K00l-Aid, anyone?


From: Jeff on
On Jan 6, 2:06 pm, Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> wrote:
> 180,000,000 people in the US will be effected by arctic air this week,
> with much lower than usual temperatures.
>
> Oh, wait. I forgot what Clinton said: "And you need to realize, some
> areas will be getting colder."
>
> Um, FLORIDA?!?!?!?!
>
> More K00l-Aid, anyone?

You're talking about weather. Weather and climate are two different
things. While the weather is quite cold, the average temperature is
still much higher over the entire year than it was before CO2 started
to rise.
From: in2dadark on
On Jan 6, 2:06 pm, Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> wrote:
> 180,000,000 people in the US will be effected by arctic air this week,
> with much lower than usual temperatures.
>
> Oh, wait. I forgot what Clinton said: "And you need to realize, some
> areas will be getting colder."
>
> Um, FLORIDA?!?!?!?!
>
> More K00l-Aid, anyone?

Freezing last night. I like it..:0) You should see the native
Floridians. They're a riot. When it's cold I can find all of my
customers AT HOME.. hugging the space heater..They're hilarious..
From: Mike Hunter on
NOT TRUE! The CO2 level is less than on tenth of one percent of the
atmosphere today. During the millions of years the dinosaurs roamed the
earth it was closer to one percent according to the geological record.


"Jeff" <jeff.utz(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11fed307-ff1a-4c13-a1c7-78f7a6e0c2ee(a)q41g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 6, 2:06 pm, Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> wrote:
>> 180,000,000 people in the US will be effected by arctic air this week,
>> with much lower than usual temperatures.
>>
>> Oh, wait. I forgot what Clinton said: "And you need to realize, some
>> areas will be getting colder."
>>
>> Um, FLORIDA?!?!?!?!
>>
>> More K00l-Aid, anyone?
>
> You're talking about weather. Weather and climate are two different
> things. While the weather is quite cold, the average temperature is
> still much higher over the entire year than it was before CO2 started
> to rise.


From: Jeff Strickland on

"Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2(a)lycos,com> wrote in message
news:4b46153a$0$13126$ce5e7886(a)news-radius.ptd.net...
> Evidence? We are still waiting for the scientific evidence that proves
> CO2, a gas the comprise less than one tenth of one percent of our
> atmosphere, can effect the average temperature of the earth either up or
> down.
>
> Why do you bury your head in the sand and deny that there is NO scientific
> evidence that proves CO2, a gas the comprise less than one tenth of one
> percent of our atmosphere, can effect the average temperature of the earth
> either up or down
>
>

I'm not here to advance the theory of global warming, but the notion is that
you can erect a wooden framework in your backyard and cover it with a thin
layer of plastic, and the temps inside the structure will be warmer than
those outside. The plastic is clearly an insignificant barrier in any
practical sense in terms of mass or any other measure, but the air trapped
inside can support growing springtime plants in the dead of winter, so the
idea that the air inside is warmer than the air outside is irrefutable.

So, the theory goes that a thin layer of CO2 acts just like the plastic --
it traps air inside that is warmer than the air outside. (What is really
trapped is solar energy, which warms the air.)

Your argument, Mike, that the theory isn't proven is a bit of a misnomer.
Your argument that the effect is insignificant is probably a better one to
stand on. The greater cause of climate change is natural cycles of solar
energy, and we can't do anything about that.

One thing the greenhouse does that is not talked about is that it levels out
temperature changes through out the day. As the sun rises, the barrier traps
cold air from the night before and keeps the inside of the greenhouse cool
for hours, then as the sun sets in the afternoon the greenhouse remains
relatively warm, again, for hours. The heat source turns on and off -- the
sun rises and sets -- yet the temps inside the greenhouse go up more slowly
and go down more slowly. The temps inside the greenhouse are flatter than
the temps outside.

On a global scale, the cycles of warming and cooling would obviously not be
days or weeks, or even years. The cycles would be decades or centuries, or
even millinia, but the cycles would be the same. Heat Rise is phenomena that
says when heat is applied to a point then removed, the heat will continue to
rise several degrees, or at the very least remain at the same level for some
period of time before it drops. Then the heat will fall or remain flat for a
period after the heat is reapplied. Think of how your oven works, or a pot
of boiling water. On a global scale, this lag time would take a very long
time to be seen, and the global warming alarmists could be explaining today
something that really happened thousands of years ago, and what's happening
today will not be seen for thousnads of years.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that the Global Wrming Alarmists are
catching the temps inside the greenhouse after the sun has set, yet the
temps have not fallen off yet. They are demanding public policy that will in
effect take down the structure in the backyard so you can only grow in
summer, yet they are ignoring the shortages that will result when Climate
Change swigns to the sunset side of the pendulum once again.

The planet has gone from hot to an ice age back to hot again. How hot? I
can't tell. Will it go cold again? Why wouldn't it?

If you take a block of ice out of the freezer and put it on the table
outside, it will remain for some period of time. As it melts, the rate of
melting speeds up as the ice is nearly gone. Most of North America was once
covered with an ice sheet that began melting. We are nearing the end of the
ice, so the rate of melting of the remaining ice speeds up. It's the whole
Thermal Mass thing, where the mass of cold is diminishing so the rate that
the mass recedes speeds up. The problem for the Global Warming Alarminsts is
that they are trying to portray the increase in the rate of decline of the
thermal mass as a manmade phenomena, but this measure -- loss of thermal
mass -- is not nammade at all. They, the global warmign alarmists, have
spent decades compiling data of the loss of thermal mass, and portraying
that loss as human caused, but anybody that watches ice melt can see what
I'm talking about.