On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 11:35:24 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> **No. I am stating, unequivocally, that the level of CO2 in our
> atmosphere is a significant driver of temperature on this planet.

So you're wrong, wrong, wrong!!!

Our KEY factor now is the *rapidly diminishing magnetosphere*.

It's down over 30%

Go on, tell us how a 30% INCREASE in solar radiation reaching through
our protective magnetic layer has less effect on "warming" than CO2:

https://www.abc15.com/news/state/photos-northern-lights-visible-in-arizona-sunday-night
Some Arizonans got the rare opportunity to see the Northern Lights Sunday night.

Experts predicted the lights would be more visible in other parts of the country on April 23, 2023, but as the day went on, it was believed that areas in northern California would be able to see them, too.

pic.twitter.com/eAZdtJY6g1

— NOAA Space Weather (@NWSSWPC) April 23, 2023
However, as pictured by numerous ABC15 viewers across northern Arizona and near the Valley, hues of purple were seen as far south as Arizona!

https://abc7amarillo.com/news/local/northern-lights-spotted-in-texas-aurora-borealis-norther-lights-red-pillars-texas-panhandle
AMARILLO, Texas (KVII) - As expected, the Northern lights were able to put on a show for onlookers in the northern Hemisphere Thursday and Friday evenings. The northern lights were even able to be witnessed with long exposure camera shots as far south as the Texas panhandle!

https://patch.com/florida/across-fl/northern-lights-may-be-seen-far-south-fl-month-heres-why

Space weather forecasters expect March to be the best month to view
more frequent aurora borealis in Florida, with green painting the sky.

Which you now KNOW is a consequence of the magnetosphere being down by
over 30%!

https://www.science.org/content/article/earths-waning-magnet
Earth's magnetic field is rapidly getting weaker, and geophysicists
don't know why. The decrease in strength--a startling 10% in the last
160 years--could signal that the magnetic field is starting one of its
sporadic flip-flops. But even if it's just a temporary blip, Earth's
atmosphere may sustain some damage, according to reports here 11
December at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU).

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/satellites/a43412493/nasa-tracking-dent-in-earths-magnetic-field/
Our magnetic field has a dent in it—what ScienceAlert calls a “pothole in space.”

It’s called the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA), and it’s not a physical
dent. It’s a region in the skies between South America and Africa where
our magnetic field is weaker than it is around the rest of the planet.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-00700-0
Unusual shrinkage and reshaping of Earth’s magnetosphere under a strong
northward interplanetary magnetic field

https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/space-science/earth-magnetic-field-reversal-affect-climate
vensmark was able to calculate this enhancement in the ionisation rate
to be about 25% at the equatorial surface as the magnetic field
weakened, and over six times higher in the upper atmosphere.

Overall, his model showed a 13% increase in ionisation at sea level around the globe and roughly a doubling at the top of the atmosphere.

Svensmark notes that there appear to be correlations between the flux
of cosmic rays reaching Earth’s atmosphere and the climate, although it
is not entirely clear what mechanism might cause this.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:31:44 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> **The word "likely" indicates that you have no idea. I accept that.
> These guys have examined all the known influences on our climate and
> have reached the same conclusion that Arrhenius reached more than 120
> years ago:

Nope.

Our KEY factor now is the *rapidly diminishing magnetosphere*.

It's down over 30%

Go on, tell us how a 30% INCREASE in solar radiation reaching through
our protective magnetic layer has less effect on "warming" than CO2:

https://www.abc15.com/news/state/photos-northern-lights-visible-in-arizona-sunday-night
Some Arizonans got the rare opportunity to see the Northern Lights Sunday night.

Experts predicted the lights would be more visible in other parts of the country on April 23, 2023, but as the day went on, it was believed that areas in northern California would be able to see them, too.

pic.twitter.com/eAZdtJY6g1

— NOAA Space Weather (@NWSSWPC) April 23, 2023
However, as pictured by numerous ABC15 viewers across northern Arizona and near the Valley, hues of purple were seen as far south as Arizona!

https://abc7amarillo.com/news/local/northern-lights-spotted-in-texas-aurora-borealis-norther-lights-red-pillars-texas-panhandle
AMARILLO, Texas (KVII) - As expected, the Northern lights were able to put on a show for onlookers in the northern Hemisphere Thursday and Friday evenings. The northern lights were even able to be witnessed with long exposure camera shots as far south as the Texas panhandle!

https://patch.com/florida/across-fl/northern-lights-may-be-seen-far-south-fl-month-heres-why

Space weather forecasters expect March to be the best month to view
more frequent aurora borealis in Florida, with green painting the sky.

Which you now KNOW is a consequence of the magnetosphere being down by
over 30%!

https://www.science.org/content/article/earths-waning-magnet
Earth's magnetic field is rapidly getting weaker, and geophysicists
don't know why. The decrease in strength--a startling 10% in the last
160 years--could signal that the magnetic field is starting one of its
sporadic flip-flops. But even if it's just a temporary blip, Earth's
atmosphere may sustain some damage, according to reports here 11
December at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU).

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/satellites/a43412493/nasa-tracking-dent-in-earths-magnetic-field/
Our magnetic field has a dent in it—what ScienceAlert calls a “pothole in space.”

It’s called the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA), and it’s not a physical
dent. It’s a region in the skies between South America and Africa where
our magnetic field is weaker than it is around the rest of the planet.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-00700-0
Unusual shrinkage and reshaping of Earth’s magnetosphere under a strong
northward interplanetary magnetic field

https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/space-science/earth-magnetic-field-reversal-affect-climate
vensmark was able to calculate this enhancement in the ionisation rate
to be about 25% at the equatorial surface as the magnetic field
weakened, and over six times higher in the upper atmosphere.

Overall, his model showed a 13% increase in ionisation at sea level around the globe and roughly a doubling at the top of the atmosphere.

Svensmark notes that there appear to be correlations between the flux
of cosmic rays reaching Earth’s atmosphere and the climate, although it
is not entirely clear what mechanism might cause this.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:57:22 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> **And that, alone, is a HUGE concern, given the low level of Solar
> activity at present.

Nope.

Our KEY factor now is the *rapidly diminishing magnetosphere*.

It's down over 30%

Go on, tell us how a 30% INCREASE in solar radiation reaching through
our protective magnetic layer has less effect on "warming" than CO2:

https://www.abc15.com/news/state/photos-northern-lights-visible-in-arizona-sunday-night
Some Arizonans got the rare opportunity to see the Northern Lights Sunday night.

Experts predicted the lights would be more visible in other parts of the country on April 23, 2023, but as the day went on, it was believed that areas in northern California would be able to see them, too.

pic.twitter.com/eAZdtJY6g1

— NOAA Space Weather (@NWSSWPC) April 23, 2023
However, as pictured by numerous ABC15 viewers across northern Arizona and near the Valley, hues of purple were seen as far south as Arizona!

https://abc7amarillo.com/news/local/northern-lights-spotted-in-texas-aurora-borealis-norther-lights-red-pillars-texas-panhandle
AMARILLO, Texas (KVII) - As expected, the Northern lights were able to put on a show for onlookers in the northern Hemisphere Thursday and Friday evenings. The northern lights were even able to be witnessed with long exposure camera shots as far south as the Texas panhandle!

https://patch.com/florida/across-fl/northern-lights-may-be-seen-far-south-fl-month-heres-why

Space weather forecasters expect March to be the best month to view
more frequent aurora borealis in Florida, with green painting the sky.

Which you now KNOW is a consequence of the magnetosphere being down by
over 30%!

https://www.science.org/content/article/earths-waning-magnet
Earth's magnetic field is rapidly getting weaker, and geophysicists
don't know why. The decrease in strength--a startling 10% in the last
160 years--could signal that the magnetic field is starting one of its
sporadic flip-flops. But even if it's just a temporary blip, Earth's
atmosphere may sustain some damage, according to reports here 11
December at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU).

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/satellites/a43412493/nasa-tracking-dent-in-earths-magnetic-field/
Our magnetic field has a dent in it—what ScienceAlert calls a “pothole in space.”

It’s called the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA), and it’s not a physical
dent. It’s a region in the skies between South America and Africa where
our magnetic field is weaker than it is around the rest of the planet.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-00700-0
Unusual shrinkage and reshaping of Earth’s magnetosphere under a strong
northward interplanetary magnetic field

https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/space-science/earth-magnetic-field-reversal-affect-climate
vensmark was able to calculate this enhancement in the ionisation rate
to be about 25% at the equatorial surface as the magnetic field
weakened, and over six times higher in the upper atmosphere.

Overall, his model showed a 13% increase in ionisation at sea level around the globe and roughly a doubling at the top of the atmosphere.

Svensmark notes that there appear to be correlations between the flux
of cosmic rays reaching Earth’s atmosphere and the climate, although it
is not entirely clear what mechanism might cause this.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:19:48 +1000
Ördög <ordog@your.service.biz> wrote:

> NOT ONE modern first world
> > country is even self replacing now if you take out immigration
> > and that's true of most of the second world too.
>
> If you and racist ilk dies out no one will give a shit!
> And that is a certainty!

Meanwhile vermin like YOU prefer Sweden and Germany to be Muzzie rape
camps.

You exterminable filth!

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 10:01:49 +0200
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> It's the sun. To prove it, go outside when it's night and see if it
> the temperature has changed. ;)
>
> Also note that the energy from the sun that hits the earth is about
> 100x the energy release by burning fossil fuels. If humans change
> anything it is very, very small to the point of not caring.
>

TY!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm
I have closely followed the carbon dioxide warming arguments. From what I have learned of how the atmosphere ticks over 40 years of study, I have been unable to convince myself that a doubling of human-induced greenhouse gases can lead to anything but quite small and insignificant amounts of global warming.

The author is a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado where he is an expert in tropical meteorology.

> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024, Mich wrote:
>
> > FFS - Diebold Foundation videos!
> > Junk science grifters who suck in the dumbest hicks.
> > You shot yourself in the foot by citing them.
> >
> > Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> >>>
> >> Try educating yourself.
> >>
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQoMHt4UZZY&list=PLYRAmtDzQomgyo8ht4F6VuJWNpge5OP-M
> >>
> >> Video Series 1 on the basic information theory should be seen
> >> first to fully understand the philosophy behind discovering what
> >> causes the polar reversals and ice ages.
> >> Video series 4, Part 1B, covers the most important
> >> information for anyone on this planet because I will fully explain
> >> what causes the ice ages and why they happen immediately after a
> >> geomagnetic reversal (Pole shift, polar reversal). The last time
> >> it happened was about 12,000 years age and it is estimated that
> >> only about 30 fertile females survived and all of us are related
> >> to one of them. If you have any questions on any of the videos,
> >> just send your questions to research@dieholdfoundation.com or
> >> info@dieholdfoundation.com and they will be answered directly or
> >> in a Q&A video in that series. List of all the video Series’s:
> >>
> >> Video Series 1 The Theory of Multidimensional Reality.
> >> Part 1: The two different ways to describe the Universe:
> >>
> >> • Series 1, Part 1, The Two Ways to Des... .
> >> Part 2: Defining the Problem. How I found the Clock Cycle in the
> >> Universe;
> >>
> >> • Series 1, Part 2; The Secret of the U... .
> >> Part 3: Creation of the Atom and Defining Dimensions;
> >>
> >> • Series 1, Part 3.Theory of Multidimen... .
> >> Part 4: Dimensions 5-8. What is Gravity;
> >>
> >> • Series 1, Part 4, Theory of Multidime... .
> >> Part 5: What is Light;
> >>
> >> • Series 1, Part 5, What is Light the T... .
> >> Part 6: The Subatomic “Particles” and what they Really are;
> >>
> >> • Series 1, Part 6, Are we in a Hologra... .
> >> Part 7: Where Quasars get their energy;
> >>
> >> • Quasars, Black Holes, are we in a Ho... .
> >> Part 8: The Crisis in Physics;
> >>
> >> • Series1, Part 8, There cannot be any ... .
> >>
> >> Video Series 2. Creation of the Hebrew Alphabet.
> >> Part 1: The creation model of the Hebrew Alphabet;
> >>
> >> • Series 2, Part 1, Creation of the Heb... .
> >> Part 2: The science philosophy behind the Hebrew Alphabet;
> >>
> >> • Series 2, Part 2, The Creation and Fo... .
> >> Part 3: The Three Shapes the Letters Form;
> >>
> >> • Series 2, Part 3, The 3 shapes the 22... .
> >> Part 4: Dating the Torah and the Technology;
> >>
> >> • Series 2, Part 4, Secret of the Unive... .
> >>
> >> Video Series 3. Gravity & time experiments.
> >> Part 1: Field Experiment at Oregon Vortex, Santa Cruz Mystery Spot;
> >>
> >> • Series 3, Gravitational Mystery Spots... .
> >>
> >> Video Series 4. Causes of the Ice Ages & Polar Reversals.
> >> Part 1: Clock cycles that cause the reversals;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Introduction, Causes of the... .
> >> Part 2: Proof Sun novas;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 2, Causes of the Ice A... .
> >> Part 2B: Proof all stars Nova;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 2B, All Stars Nova on ... .
> >> Part 3: The great flood;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 3, Causes of the Ice A... .
> >> Part 4A: Sea level changes;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 4A, The 14C Evidence o... .
> >> Part 4B: Meteors do not cause extinctions;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 4B, Causes of the Ice ... .
> >> Part 4C/E: 14C dating Issues;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 4E The mass extinction... .
> >> Part 4D: Greenland crater;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 4D The Last Ice Age an... .
> >> Part 4F: Earth’s rotation reverses during polar reversal;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 4F, The Earths Rotatio... .
> >> Part 4G: Mechanism that creates the Earth’s magnetic field &
> >> rotation?;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 4G, 2nd Half, Why the ... .
> >> Part 5A: Ways to survive the reversal;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 5A, When will the Pole... .
> >> Part 5B: The easy way to survive;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 5B, Where to go and ho... .
> >> Part 5C: Most coded secret in the Torah;
> >>
> >> • Series 4, Part 5C, The Easy Way to Su... .
> >>
> >> Video Series 6. Moses 10 Code Systems:
> >> Part 1: Code systems 1-7;
> >>
> >> • Series 6 Part 1, Moses 10 Code System... .
> >> Part 2: Code systems 8-10, #12,068 Embedded in the Torah;
> >>
> >> • Series 6 part 2, Moses and the 10 cod... .
> >>
> >> Video Series 7. God’s Code System:
> >> Part 1: God’s 11th code system;
> >>
> >> • Series 7 part 1, God's Code System, 1... .
> >> Part 2: 12,068 day cycles:
> >>
> >> • Series 7, Part 2, God's 11th Code Sys... .
> >>
> >> Video Series 8. Abraham & the cave:
> >> Part 1: Why Abraham Sold his Half Sister 2X;
> >>
> >> • Series 8, Part 1; Volume I, From Abra... .
> >> Part 2: Coded Names for Mount Sinai & the Technology in the cave;
> >>
> >> • Series 8, Part 2, From Abraham to Jacob .
> >>
> >> Video Series 9. Joseph & slavery for 11 Tribes:
> >> Part 1: Young Joseph;
> >>
> >> • Series 9, Part 1, Vol. II, Joseph was... .
> >> Part 2: Becomes prime minister;
> >>
> >> • Series 9, Part 2, From Volume II, Jos... .
> >> Part 3: 11 tribes enslaved;
> >>
> >> • Series 9, Part 3, From Volume II, Sla... .
> >>
> >> Video Series 10. The Exodus and Finding the Real Mount Sinai: Part
> >> 1: the Pharaoh;
> >>
> >> • Series 10, Part 1, Egypt just before ... .
> >> Part 2: Moses & the cave;
> >>
> >> • Series 10, Part 2, From Volume III; T... .
> >> Part 3: The Altars;
> >>
> >> • Series 10, Part 3, From Volume III; F... .
> >> Part 4: The Ark:
> >>
> >> • Series 10, Part 4, From Volume III; H... .
> >> Part 5: After Mount Sinai;
> >>
> >> • Series 10, Part 5, How to survive the... .
> >> Part 6: The missing 12 tribes:
> >>
> >> • Series 10, Part 6, Why did God do thi... .
> >>
> >> Video Series 12. How & who Changed the Science:
> >> Part 1: How & Who;
> >>
> >> • Series 12, Part 1; How & Who changed ... .
> >> Part 2: Why the Piso’s did it;
> >>
> >> • Series 12, Part 2, Why did the Piso's... .
> >>
> >
> >

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 18:59:49 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> Solar radiation amounts to around 4.4 X 10^16 Watts.

Our KEY factor now is the *rapidly diminishing magnetosphere*.

It's down over 30%

Go on, tell us how a 30% INCREASE in solar radiation reaching through
our protective magnetic layer has less effect on "warming" than CO2:

https://www.abc15.com/news/state/photos-northern-lights-visible-in-arizona-sunday-night
Some Arizonans got the rare opportunity to see the Northern Lights Sunday night.

Experts predicted the lights would be more visible in other parts of the country on April 23, 2023, but as the day went on, it was believed that areas in northern California would be able to see them, too.

pic.twitter.com/eAZdtJY6g1

— NOAA Space Weather (@NWSSWPC) April 23, 2023
However, as pictured by numerous ABC15 viewers across northern Arizona and near the Valley, hues of purple were seen as far south as Arizona!

https://abc7amarillo.com/news/local/northern-lights-spotted-in-texas-aurora-borealis-norther-lights-red-pillars-texas-panhandle
AMARILLO, Texas (KVII) - As expected, the Northern lights were able to put on a show for onlookers in the northern Hemisphere Thursday and Friday evenings. The northern lights were even able to be witnessed with long exposure camera shots as far south as the Texas panhandle!

https://patch.com/florida/across-fl/northern-lights-may-be-seen-far-south-fl-month-heres-why

Space weather forecasters expect March to be the best month to view
more frequent aurora borealis in Florida, with green painting the sky.

Which you now KNOW is a consequence of the magnetosphere being down by
over 30%!

https://www.science.org/content/article/earths-waning-magnet
Earth's magnetic field is rapidly getting weaker, and geophysicists
don't know why. The decrease in strength--a startling 10% in the last
160 years--could signal that the magnetic field is starting one of its
sporadic flip-flops. But even if it's just a temporary blip, Earth's
atmosphere may sustain some damage, according to reports here 11
December at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU).

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/satellites/a43412493/nasa-tracking-dent-in-earths-magnetic-field/
Our magnetic field has a dent in it—what ScienceAlert calls a “pothole in space.”

It’s called the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA), and it’s not a physical
dent. It’s a region in the skies between South America and Africa where
our magnetic field is weaker than it is around the rest of the planet.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-00700-0
Unusual shrinkage and reshaping of Earth’s magnetosphere under a strong
northward interplanetary magnetic field

https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/space-science/earth-magnetic-field-reversal-affect-climate
vensmark was able to calculate this enhancement in the ionisation rate
to be about 25% at the equatorial surface as the magnetic field
weakened, and over six times higher in the upper atmosphere.

Overall, his model showed a 13% increase in ionisation at sea level around the globe and roughly a doubling at the top of the atmosphere.

Svensmark notes that there appear to be correlations between the flux
of cosmic rays reaching Earth’s atmosphere and the climate, although it
is not entirely clear what mechanism might cause this.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:57:22 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> At least you understand Solar cycles, unlike the
> rest of the morons.

Our KEY factor now is the *rapidly diminishing magnetosphere*.

It's down over 30%

Go on, tell us how a 30% INCREASE in solar radiation reaching through
our protective magnetic layer has less effect on "warming" than CO2:

https://www.abc15.com/news/state/photos-northern-lights-visible-in-arizona-sunday-night
Some Arizonans got the rare opportunity to see the Northern Lights Sunday night.

Experts predicted the lights would be more visible in other parts of the country on April 23, 2023, but as the day went on, it was believed that areas in northern California would be able to see them, too.

pic.twitter.com/eAZdtJY6g1

— NOAA Space Weather (@NWSSWPC) April 23, 2023
However, as pictured by numerous ABC15 viewers across northern Arizona and near the Valley, hues of purple were seen as far south as Arizona!

https://abc7amarillo.com/news/local/northern-lights-spotted-in-texas-aurora-borealis-norther-lights-red-pillars-texas-panhandle
AMARILLO, Texas (KVII) - As expected, the Northern lights were able to put on a show for onlookers in the northern Hemisphere Thursday and Friday evenings. The northern lights were even able to be witnessed with long exposure camera shots as far south as the Texas panhandle!

https://patch.com/florida/across-fl/northern-lights-may-be-seen-far-south-fl-month-heres-why

Space weather forecasters expect March to be the best month to view
more frequent aurora borealis in Florida, with green painting the sky.

Which you now KNOW is a consequence of the magnetosphere being down by
over 30%!

https://www.science.org/content/article/earths-waning-magnet
Earth's magnetic field is rapidly getting weaker, and geophysicists
don't know why. The decrease in strength--a startling 10% in the last
160 years--could signal that the magnetic field is starting one of its
sporadic flip-flops. But even if it's just a temporary blip, Earth's
atmosphere may sustain some damage, according to reports here 11
December at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU).

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/satellites/a43412493/nasa-tracking-dent-in-earths-magnetic-field/
Our magnetic field has a dent in it—what ScienceAlert calls a “pothole in space.”

It’s called the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA), and it’s not a physical
dent. It’s a region in the skies between South America and Africa where
our magnetic field is weaker than it is around the rest of the planet.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-00700-0
Unusual shrinkage and reshaping of Earth’s magnetosphere under a strong
northward interplanetary magnetic field

https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/space-science/earth-magnetic-field-reversal-affect-climate
vensmark was able to calculate this enhancement in the ionisation rate
to be about 25% at the equatorial surface as the magnetic field
weakened, and over six times higher in the upper atmosphere.

Overall, his model showed a 13% increase in ionisation at sea level around the globe and roughly a doubling at the top of the atmosphere.

Svensmark notes that there appear to be correlations between the flux
of cosmic rays reaching Earth’s atmosphere and the climate, although it
is not entirely clear what mechanism might cause this.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:31:44 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> > Negative feedback
>
> **What negative feedback?

Are you a mental moron, or just a rampant denier?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm

As human-induced greenhouse gases rise, global-averaged upper-level atmospheric water vapour and thin cirrus should be expected to decrease not increase.

Water vapour and cirrus cloudiness should be thought of as a negative rather than a positive feedback to human-induced - or anthropogenic greenhouse gas increases.

No significant human-induced greenhouse gas warming can occur with such
a negative feedback loop.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 06:49:37 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> CO2
> is highly resonant at several, critical infra red (IR) frequencies.
> And it is the resonance at IR that is the big problem with CO2. It's
> how CO2 'punches above it's weight' in the atmosphere.

BULLSHITE!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm

As a boy, I remember seeing articles about the large global warming that had taken place between 1900 and 1945. No one understood or knew if this warming would continue. Then the warming abated and I heard little about such warming through the late 1940s and into the 1970s.

In fact, surface measurements showed a small global cooling between the mid-1940s and the early 1970s. During the 1970s, there was speculation concerning an increase in this cooling. Some speculated that a new ice age may not be far off.

Then in the 1980s, it all changed again. The current global warming bandwagon that US-European governments have been alarming us with is still in full swing.

Not our fault

Are we, the fossil-fuel-burning public, partially responsible for this recent warming trend? Almost assuredly not.

These small global temperature increases of the last 25 years and over the last century are likely natural changes that the globe has seen many times in the past.

Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes

This small warming is likely a result of the natural alterations in global ocean currents which are driven by ocean salinity variations. Ocean circulation variations are as yet little understood.

Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes. We are not that influential.

There is a negative or complementary nature to human-induced greenhouse gas increases in comparison with the dominant natural greenhouse gas of water vapour and its cloud derivatives.

It has been assumed by the human-induced global warming advocates that as anthropogenic greenhouse gases increase that water vapour and upper-level cloudiness will also rise and lead to accelerated warming - a positive feedback loop.

It is not the human-induced greenhouse gases themselves which cause significant warming but the assumed extra water vapour and cloudiness that some scientists hypothesise.

Negative feedback

The global general circulation models which simulate significant amounts of human-induced warming are incorrectly structured to give this positive feedback loop.

Their internal model assumptions are thus not realistic.

Mainstream opinion believes that pollution contributes to climate change
As human-induced greenhouse gases rise, global-averaged upper-level atmospheric water vapour and thin cirrus should be expected to decrease not increase.

Water vapour and cirrus cloudiness should be thought of as a negative rather than a positive feedback to human-induced - or anthropogenic greenhouse gas increases.

No significant human-induced greenhouse gas warming can occur with such a negative feedback loop.

Climate debate has 'life of its own'

Our global climate's temperature has always fluctuated back and forth and it will continue to do so, irrespective of how much or how little greenhouse gases we put into the atmosphere.

Although initially generated by honest scientific questions of how human-produced greenhouse gases might affect global climate, this topic has now taken on a life of its own.

It has been extended and grossly exaggerated and misused by those wishing to make gain from the exploitation of ignorance on this subject.

This includes the governments of developed countries, the media and scientists who are willing to bend their objectivity to obtain government grants for research on this topic.

I have closely followed the carbon dioxide warming arguments. From what I have learned of how the atmosphere ticks over 40 years of study, I have been unable to convince myself that a doubling of human-induced greenhouse gases can lead to anything but quite small and insignificant amounts of global warming.

The author is a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado where he
is an expert in tropical meteorology.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:06:20 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> High levels of CO2
> will do that.
Liar.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm

As a boy, I remember seeing articles about the large global warming that had taken place between 1900 and 1945. No one understood or knew if this warming would continue. Then the warming abated and I heard little about such warming through the late 1940s and into the 1970s.

In fact, surface measurements showed a small global cooling between the mid-1940s and the early 1970s. During the 1970s, there was speculation concerning an increase in this cooling. Some speculated that a new ice age may not be far off.

Then in the 1980s, it all changed again. The current global warming bandwagon that US-European governments have been alarming us with is still in full swing.

Not our fault

Are we, the fossil-fuel-burning public, partially responsible for this recent warming trend? Almost assuredly not.

These small global temperature increases of the last 25 years and over the last century are likely natural changes that the globe has seen many times in the past.

Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes

This small warming is likely a result of the natural alterations in global ocean currents which are driven by ocean salinity variations. Ocean circulation variations are as yet little understood.

Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes. We are not that influential.

There is a negative or complementary nature to human-induced greenhouse gas increases in comparison with the dominant natural greenhouse gas of water vapour and its cloud derivatives.

It has been assumed by the human-induced global warming advocates that as anthropogenic greenhouse gases increase that water vapour and upper-level cloudiness will also rise and lead to accelerated warming - a positive feedback loop.

It is not the human-induced greenhouse gases themselves which cause significant warming but the assumed extra water vapour and cloudiness that some scientists hypothesise.

Negative feedback

The global general circulation models which simulate significant amounts of human-induced warming are incorrectly structured to give this positive feedback loop.

Their internal model assumptions are thus not realistic.

Carbon dioxide BBC
Mainstream opinion believes that pollution contributes to climate change
As human-induced greenhouse gases rise, global-averaged upper-level atmospheric water vapour and thin cirrus should be expected to decrease not increase.

Water vapour and cirrus cloudiness should be thought of as a negative rather than a positive feedback to human-induced - or anthropogenic greenhouse gas increases.

No significant human-induced greenhouse gas warming can occur with such a negative feedback loop.

Climate debate has 'life of its own'

Our global climate's temperature has always fluctuated back and forth and it will continue to do so, irrespective of how much or how little greenhouse gases we put into the atmosphere.

Although initially generated by honest scientific questions of how human-produced greenhouse gases might affect global climate, this topic has now taken on a life of its own.

It has been extended and grossly exaggerated and misused by those wishing to make gain from the exploitation of ignorance on this subject.

This includes the governments of developed countries, the media and scientists who are willing to bend their objectivity to obtain government grants for research on this topic.

I have closely followed the carbon dioxide warming arguments. From what I have learned of how the atmosphere ticks over 40 years of study, I have been unable to convince myself that a doubling of human-induced greenhouse gases can lead to anything but quite small and insignificant amounts of global warming.

The author is a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado where he
is an expert in tropical meteorology.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:21:21 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> **I'm suggesting that we look forward in time.

That would be speculative, not confirmational.

You are incapable of dealing with actual climatic and fossil records.

On 13/04/2024 1:52 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 06:49:37 +1000
> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> CO2
>> is highly resonant at several, critical infra red (IR) frequencies.
>> And it is the resonance at IR that is the big problem with CO2. It's
>> how CO2 'punches above it's weight' in the atmosphere.
>
> BULLSHITE!!!
>

**Nope. FACT.

Once more: Despite your idiotic claims, CO2 is NOT an inert gas.

Go and learn some basic science.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 13/04/2024 12:37 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:21:21 +1000
> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> **"Bad thing"? It was a thing. Previous cooling and warming periods
>> you mention were likely caused by changes in Solar activity. We know
>> that the Sun is the major driver of temperatures on this planet.
>
> Finally!
>
> Yes, we have a 3/6/12K year solar micronova cycle!
>
>> However, we also know that CO2 and other GHGs exert a measurable and
>> significant effect.
>
> We absolutely DO NOT know that .04% of CO2 has any effect at all!

**Sure we do. Arrhenius proved it more than 120 years ago.

>
>> In fact, we know that Solar activity has fallen
>> over the past few Solar cycles, yet the planet continues to warm.
>
> Yes we do, it's called a lagging indicator in a natural cycle back to
> glaciation, and we NOW these temperatures now are historically on the
> low end of that cycle, even with the recent recover to norms.

**What "natural cycle"?

You need to present evidence of this so-called "natural cycle" you speak of.

>
>> This is deeply concerning, as we also know that Solar activity is
>> likely to return to normal sometime in the future (no one knows when).
>
> Won't matter because the solar micronova will realign the continents
> and usher in anther glacial epoch.

**When will this alleged "solar micronova" occur? Where will it occur?

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 13/04/2024 12:40 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:21:21 +1000
> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Excessive CO2 emissions are raising the
>> temperature of the planet.
>
> Nope, not even slightly!
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm
>
> I have closely followed the carbon dioxide warming arguments. From what I have learned of how the atmosphere ticks over 40 years of study, I have been unable to convince myself that a doubling of human-induced greenhouse gases can lead to anything but quite small and insignificant amounts of global warming.
>
> The author is a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado where he is an expert in tropical meteorology.
>
>
>
>

**No. The DISCREDITED author is dead.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 13/04/2024 1:36 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 10:01:49 +0200
> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>> It's the sun. To prove it, go outside when it's night and see if it
>> the temperature has changed. ;)
>>
>> Also note that the energy from the sun that hits the earth is about
>> 100x the energy release by burning fossil fuels. If humans change
>> anything it is very, very small to the point of not caring.
>>
>
> TY!
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm
> I have closely followed the carbon dioxide warming arguments. From what I have learned of how the atmosphere ticks over 40 years of study, I have been unable to convince myself that a doubling of human-induced greenhouse gases can lead to anything but quite small and insignificant amounts of global warming.
>
> The author is a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado where he is an expert in tropical meteorology.
>
>

**Nope. The DISCREDITED author has been dead for many years. Climate
science has moved on. The auhor has not, because he is dead you boob.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 07:51:42 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 13/04/2024 12:37 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:21:21 +1000
> > Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >> **"Bad thing"? It was a thing. Previous cooling and warming periods
> >> you mention were likely caused by changes in Solar activity. We
> >> know that the Sun is the major driver of temperatures on this
> >> planet.
> >
> > Finally!
> >
> > Yes, we have a 3/6/12K year solar micronova cycle!
> >
> >> However, we also know that CO2 and other GHGs exert a measurable
> >> and significant effect.
> >
> > We absolutely DO NOT know that .04% of CO2 has any effect at all!
>
> **Sure we do. Arrhenius proved it more than 120 years ago.
>
> >
> >> In fact, we know that Solar activity has fallen
> >> over the past few Solar cycles, yet the planet continues to warm.
> >
> > Yes we do, it's called a lagging indicator in a natural cycle back
> > to glaciation, and we NOW these temperatures now are historically
> > on the low end of that cycle, even with the recent recover to
> > norms.
>
> **What "natural cycle"?

Uh...CLIMATE!!!
> You need to present evidence of this so-called "natural cycle" you
> speak of.

https://science.nasa.gov/science-research/earth-science/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/

Cycles also play key roles in Earth’s short-term weather and long-term climate. A century ago, Serbian scientist Milutin Milankovitch hypothesized the long-term, collective effects of changes in Earth’s position relative to the Sun are a strong driver of Earth’s long-term climate, and are responsible for triggering the beginning and end of glaciation periods (Ice Ages).

Specifically, he examined how variations in three types of Earth orbital movements affect how much solar radiation (known as insolation) reaches the top of Earth’s atmosphere as well as where the insolation reaches. These cyclical orbital movements, which became known as the Milankovitch cycles, cause variations of up to 25 percent in the amount of incoming insolation at Earth’s mid-latitudes (the areas of our planet located between about 30 and 60 degrees north and south of the equator).

The Milankovitch cycles include:

The shape of Earth’s orbit, known as eccentricity;
The angle Earth’s axis is tilted with respect to Earth’s orbital plane, known as obliquity; and
The direction Earth’s axis of rotation is pointed, known as precession.

> >
> >> This is deeply concerning, as we also know that Solar activity is
> >> likely to return to normal sometime in the future (no one knows
> >> when).
> >
> > Won't matter because the solar micronova will realign the continents
> > and usher in anther glacial epoch.
>
> **When will this alleged "solar micronova" occur? Where will it occur?

2046

Far eastern Europe into Asia.

The prior one hot North and South America.

On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 07:48:30 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 13/04/2024 1:52 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 06:49:37 +1000
> > Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >> CO2
> >> is highly resonant at several, critical infra red (IR) frequencies.
> >> And it is the resonance at IR that is the big problem with CO2.
> >> It's how CO2 'punches above it's weight' in the atmosphere.
> >
> > BULLSHITE!!!
> >
>
> **Nope.

Yep:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm

As a boy, I remember seeing articles about the large global warming that had taken place between 1900 and 1945. No one understood or knew if this warming would continue. Then the warming abated and I heard little about such warming through the late 1940s and into the 1970s.

In fact, surface measurements showed a small global cooling between the mid-1940s and the early 1970s. During the 1970s, there was speculation concerning an increase in this cooling. Some speculated that a new ice age may not be far off.

Then in the 1980s, it all changed again. The current global warming bandwagon that US-European governments have been alarming us with is still in full swing.

Not our fault

Are we, the fossil-fuel-burning public, partially responsible for this recent warming trend? Almost assuredly not.

These small global temperature increases of the last 25 years and over the last century are likely natural changes that the globe has seen many times in the past.

Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes

This small warming is likely a result of the natural alterations in global ocean currents which are driven by ocean salinity variations. Ocean circulation variations are as yet little understood.

Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes. We are not that influential.

There is a negative or complementary nature to human-induced greenhouse gas increases in comparison with the dominant natural greenhouse gas of water vapour and its cloud derivatives.

It has been assumed by the human-induced global warming advocates that as anthropogenic greenhouse gases increase that water vapour and upper-level cloudiness will also rise and lead to accelerated warming - a positive feedback loop.

It is not the human-induced greenhouse gases themselves which cause significant warming but the assumed extra water vapour and cloudiness that some scientists hypothesise.

Negative feedback

The global general circulation models which simulate significant amounts of human-induced warming are incorrectly structured to give this positive feedback loop.

Their internal model assumptions are thus not realistic.

Mainstream opinion believes that pollution contributes to climate change
As human-induced greenhouse gases rise, global-averaged upper-level atmospheric water vapour and thin cirrus should be expected to decrease not increase.

Water vapour and cirrus cloudiness should be thought of as a negative rather than a positive feedback to human-induced - or anthropogenic greenhouse gas increases.

No significant human-induced greenhouse gas warming can occur with such a negative feedback loop.

Climate debate has 'life of its own'

Our global climate's temperature has always fluctuated back and forth and it will continue to do so, irrespective of how much or how little greenhouse gases we put into the atmosphere.

Although initially generated by honest scientific questions of how human-produced greenhouse gases might affect global climate, this topic has now taken on a life of its own.

It has been extended and grossly exaggerated and misused by those wishing to make gain from the exploitation of ignorance on this subject.

This includes the governments of developed countries, the media and scientists who are willing to bend their objectivity to obtain government grants for research on this topic.

I have closely followed the carbon dioxide warming arguments. From what I have learned of how the atmosphere ticks over 40 years of study, I have been unable to convince myself that a doubling of human-induced greenhouse gases can lead to anything but quite small and insignificant amounts of global warming.

The author is a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado where he
is an expert in tropical meteorology.

On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 07:52:58 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 13/04/2024 12:40 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:21:21 +1000
> > Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >> Excessive CO2 emissions are raising the
> >> temperature of the planet.
> >
> > Nope, not even slightly!
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm
> >
> > I have closely followed the carbon dioxide warming arguments. From
> > what I have learned of how the atmosphere ticks over 40 years of
> > study, I have been unable to convince myself that a doubling of
> > human-induced greenhouse gases can lead to anything but quite small
> > and insignificant amounts of global warming.
> >
> > The author is a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado where
> > he is an expert in tropical meteorology.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> **No. The DISCREDITED author is dead.
>

1. He was never "discredited" - rather the opposite in fact:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_M._Gray

He is widely regarded as a pioneer in the science of tropical cyclone
forecasting[1] and one of the world's leading experts on tropical
storms.[2] After retiring as a faculty member at CSU in 2005, Gray
remained actively involved in both climate change and tropical cyclone
research until his death.

Throughout his career, Gray received multiple awards for his pioneering research and mentorship:[4]

Fellow at the American Meteorological Society (AMS)
1992 – Colorado State University "Jack E. Cermak Graduate School Award for Outstanding Adviser
1993 – Co-recipient of the American Meteorological Society Banner I.. Miller Award
1993 – American Meteorological Society Jule G. Charney Award[19]
1995 – Neil Frank Award of the National Hurricane Conference for
"pioneering research into long-range hurricane forecasting and for
developing a better understanding of how global climatological
conditions shape the creation and intensity of tropical cyclones."
1995 – Honorary lifetime achievement award via invitation to the Eighth
IMO Lecture to the 12th World Meteorological Organization Congress in
Geneva, Switzerland. 1995 – ABC Television person of the week 1995 –
Man of Science Award from the Colorado Chapter of the Achievement
Rewards for College Scientists 2014 – first-ever recipient of the
Robert and Joanne Simpson Award

2.) He is deceased, same as everything above your neck.

On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 07:54:24 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 13/04/2024 1:36 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 10:01:49 +0200
> > D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
> >
> >> It's the sun. To prove it, go outside when it's night and see if it
> >> the temperature has changed. ;)
> >>
> >> Also note that the energy from the sun that hits the earth is about
> >> 100x the energy release by burning fossil fuels. If humans change
> >> anything it is very, very small to the point of not caring.
> >>
> >
> > TY!
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm
> > I have closely followed the carbon dioxide warming arguments. From
> > what I have learned of how the atmosphere ticks over 40 years of
> > study, I have been unable to convince myself that a doubling of
> > human-induced greenhouse gases can lead to anything but quite small
> > and insignificant amounts of global warming.
> >
> > The author is a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado where
> > he is an expert in tropical meteorology.
> >
> >
>
> **Nope. The DISCREDITED author

No "discredit" to be seen:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_M._Gray

Throughout his career, Gray received multiple awards for his pioneering research and mentorship:

Fellow at the American Meteorological Society (AMS)
1992 – Colorado State University "Jack E. Cermak Graduate School Award for Outstanding Adviser
1993 – Co-recipient of the American Meteorological Society Banner I.. Miller Award
1993 – American Meteorological Society Jule G. Charney Award
1995 – Neil Frank Award of the National Hurricane Conference for "pioneering research into long-range hurricane forecasting and for developing a better understanding of how global climatological conditions shape the creation and intensity of tropical cyclones."
1995 – Honorary lifetime achievement award via invitation to the Eighth IMO Lecture to the 12th World Meteorological Organization Congress in Geneva, Switzerland.
1995 – ABC Television person of the week
1995 – Man of Science Award from the Colorado Chapter of the Achievement Rewards for College Scientists
2014 – first-ever recipient of the Robert and Joanne Simpson Award

Now do you see what flaming fucking asshole you are?

ESAD!

On 13/04/2024 7:56 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 07:51:42 +1000
> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 13/04/2024 12:37 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:21:21 +1000
>>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> **"Bad thing"? It was a thing. Previous cooling and warming periods
>>>> you mention were likely caused by changes in Solar activity. We
>>>> know that the Sun is the major driver of temperatures on this
>>>> planet.
>>>
>>> Finally!
>>>
>>> Yes, we have a 3/6/12K year solar micronova cycle!
>>>
>>>> However, we also know that CO2 and other GHGs exert a measurable
>>>> and significant effect.
>>>
>>> We absolutely DO NOT know that .04% of CO2 has any effect at all!
>>
>> **Sure we do. Arrhenius proved it more than 120 years ago.

**Sure we do. Arrhenius proved it more than 120 years ago.

>>
>>>
>>>> In fact, we know that Solar activity has fallen
>>>> over the past few Solar cycles, yet the planet continues to warm.
>>>
>>> Yes we do, it's called a lagging indicator in a natural cycle back
>>> to glaciation, and we NOW these temperatures now are historically
>>> on the low end of that cycle, even with the recent recover to
>>> norms.
>>
>> **What "natural cycle"?
>
> Uh...CLIMATE!!!

**What "natural cycle"?

>
>> You need to present evidence of this so-called "natural cycle" you
>> speak of.
>
> https://science.nasa.gov/science-research/earth-science/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/
>
> Cycles also play key roles in Earth’s short-term weather and long-term climate. A century ago, Serbian scientist Milutin Milankovitch hypothesized the long-term, collective effects of changes in Earth’s position relative to the Sun are a strong driver of Earth’s long-term climate, and are responsible for triggering the beginning and end of glaciation periods (Ice Ages).

**Indeed. However, CO2 and other GHGs are now overriding the effects of
these alleged cycles.

>
> Specifically, he examined how variations in three types of Earth orbital movements affect how much solar radiation (known as insolation) reaches the top of Earth’s atmosphere as well as where the insolation reaches. These cyclical orbital movements, which became known as the Milankovitch cycles, cause variations of up to 25 percent in the amount of incoming insolation at Earth’s mid-latitudes (the areas of our planet located between about 30 and 60 degrees north and south of the equator).
>
> The Milankovitch cycles include:
>
> The shape of Earth’s orbit, known as eccentricity;
> The angle Earth’s axis is tilted with respect to Earth’s orbital plane, known as obliquity; and
> The direction Earth’s axis of rotation is pointed, known as precession.

**Irrelevant to the influence of GHGs on climate.

>
>
>>>
>>>> This is deeply concerning, as we also know that Solar activity is
>>>> likely to return to normal sometime in the future (no one knows
>>>> when).
>>>
>>> Won't matter because the solar micronova will realign the continents
>>> and usher in anther glacial epoch.
>>
>> **When will this alleged "solar micronova" occur? Where will it occur?
>
>
> 2046
>
> Far eastern Europe into Asia.
>
> The prior one hot North and South America.
>
>

**Prove it.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On 13/04/2024 8:02 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 07:52:58 +1000
> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 13/04/2024 12:40 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:21:21 +1000
>>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Excessive CO2 emissions are raising the
>>>> temperature of the planet.
>>>
>>> Nope, not even slightly!
>>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm
>>>
>>> I have closely followed the carbon dioxide warming arguments. From
>>> what I have learned of how the atmosphere ticks over 40 years of
>>> study, I have been unable to convince myself that a doubling of
>>> human-induced greenhouse gases can lead to anything but quite small
>>> and insignificant amounts of global warming.
>>>
>>> The author is a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado where
>>> he is an expert in tropical meteorology.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> **No. The DISCREDITED author is dead.
>>
>
> 1. He was never "discredited" - rather the opposite in fact:
>
>

**Not only has he been dead for many years, but he was discredited for
his dodgy climate science claims when he was alive.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:47:29 +1000, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>Peter Jason <pj@jostle.com> wrote
>> Ördög <ordog@your.service.biz> wrote
>>> JTEM wrote
>>>> Ördög
>
>>> Let's see who will be laughing when the planet becomes barely
>>> habitable.
>
>Not going to happen.
>
>> It's barely habitable now.
>
>Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something.
>
>> Did you know the Sheeple actually RESPIRE?
>> They all without exception draw in oxygen-laden air and excrete that
>> vile devil gas CO2. And if this were not bad enough they generate
>> even more on cremation!!!!
>
>And worse stuff when they rot in their graves.
>
>> Every brat born is a 80-year font of CO2, spewing,farting, belching
>> that gas without a care in the world!
>
>Quite a few don't manage to last that long and
>kill themselves in various ways well before that.
>
>> Clearly therefore, at the end of the day, fast approaching, the
>> solution is to cull the birth rate.
>
>Nope, its fixing itself fine. NOT ONE modern first world
>country is even self replacing now if you take out immigration
>and that's true of most of the second world too.

Rubbish! Then why has the population increased up to 7+ Billion from
the 1950s? The population of Egypt is over 100million, up from
10million in British colonialism times. We'll all be standing on each
others' shoulders before any decline occurs.

>Birth rates have been dropping like a stone
>except where its already right down in the noise
>now EVERYWHERE even in the third world.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate#1950_and_2015
>
>> Yeah man!
>
>> But don't leap off that cliff just yet, because there's hope....in the
>> form of Gene manipulation whereby the ratio ofmales to females born is
>> tilted in favor of males, sogradually reducing the number of females
>> to give birth.
>
>Fantasy.
>
>> It will be tested in Africa,
>
>Its India that cares about that, not Africa.

Yes, yes; India too.

>
>> Now isn't that good news?
>
>Nope, just another silly fantasy.
>
>> All the denizens of the Global-Warming
>> Cult can get that haircut and find a REAL job!
>
>> And dear Greta can become a working girl.
>
>No one is stupid enough to fuck her.

On 13/04/2024 12:48 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 13:57:22 +1000
> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> **And that, alone, is a HUGE concern, given the low level of Solar
>> activity at present.
>
> Nope.
>
> Our KEY factor now is the *rapidly diminishing magnetosphere*.
>
> It's down over 30%

**Just a reminder: You are claiming that the magnetosphere is "rapidly
diminishing".

That claim is NOT an hypothesis.

You need to construct a proper hypothesis. You have, thus far, failed
miserably to do so.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 08:15:00 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 13/04/2024 7:56 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 07:51:42 +1000
> > Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >> On 13/04/2024 12:37 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:21:21 +1000
> >>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> **"Bad thing"? It was a thing. Previous cooling and warming
> >>>> periods you mention were likely caused by changes in Solar
> >>>> activity. We know that the Sun is the major driver of
> >>>> temperatures on this planet.
> >>>
> >>> Finally!
> >>>
> >>> Yes, we have a 3/6/12K year solar micronova cycle!
> >>>
> >>>> However, we also know that CO2 and other GHGs exert a measurable
> >>>> and significant effect.
> >>>
> >>> We absolutely DO NOT know that .04% of CO2 has any effect at all!
> >>>
> >>
> >> **Sure we do. Arrhenius proved it more than 120 years ago.
>
> **Sure we do. Arrhenius proved it more than 120 years ago.
>

Theory is not proof.

> >>
> >>>
> >>>> In fact, we know that Solar activity has fallen
> >>>> over the past few Solar cycles, yet the planet continues to
> >>>> warm.
> >>>
> >>> Yes we do, it's called a lagging indicator in a natural cycle back
> >>> to glaciation, and we NOW these temperatures now are historically
> >>> on the low end of that cycle, even with the recent recover to
> >>> norms.
> >>
> >> **What "natural cycle"?
> >
> > Uh...CLIMATE!!!
>
> **What "natural cycle"?

CLIMATE!
> >
> >> You need to present evidence of this so-called "natural cycle" you
> >> speak of.
> >
> > https://science.nasa.gov/science-research/earth-science/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/
> >
> > Cycles also play key roles in Earth’s short-term weather and
> > long-term climate. A century ago, Serbian scientist Milutin
> > Milankovitch hypothesized the long-term, collective effects of
> > changes in Earth’s position relative to the Sun are a strong driver
> > of Earth’s long-term climate, and are responsible for triggering
> > the beginning and end of glaciation periods (Ice Ages).
>
> **Indeed. However, CO2 and other GHGs are now overriding the effects
> of these alleged cycles.

Not even close at .04% total concentration, fail.

> >
> > Specifically, he examined how variations in three types of Earth
> > orbital movements affect how much solar radiation (known as
> > insolation) reaches the top of Earth’s atmosphere as well as where
> > the insolation reaches. These cyclical orbital movements, which
> > became known as the Milankovitch cycles, cause variations of up to
> > 25 percent in the amount of incoming insolation at Earth’s
> > mid-latitudes (the areas of our planet located between about 30 and
> > 60 degrees north and south of the equator).
> >
> > The Milankovitch cycles include:
> >
> > The shape of Earth’s orbit, known as eccentricity;
> > The angle Earth’s axis is tilted with respect to Earth’s orbital
> > plane, known as obliquity; and The direction Earth’s axis of
> > rotation is pointed, known as precession.
>
> **Irrelevant to the influence of GHGs on climate.

Since scapegoated GHGs have a minute impact, partial credit.

> >
> >
> >>>
> >>>> This is deeply concerning, as we also know that Solar activity is
> >>>> likely to return to normal sometime in the future (no one knows
> >>>> when).
> >>>
> >>> Won't matter because the solar micronova will realign the
> >>> continents and usher in anther glacial epoch.
> >>
> >> **When will this alleged "solar micronova" occur? Where will it
> >> occur?
> >
> >
> > 2046
> >
> > Far eastern Europe into Asia.
> >
> > The prior one hot North and South America.
> >
> >
>
> **Prove it.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/solar-superflares-rocked-earth-less-than-10-000-years-ago-and-could-strike-again/

https://www.livescience.com/64964-huge-ancient-solar-storm-hit-earth.html

A gigantic solar storm hit Earth about 2,600 years ago, one about 10 times stronger than any solar storm recorded in the modern day, a new study finds.

These findings suggest that such explosions recur regularly in Earth's
history, and could wreak havoc if they were to hit now, given how
dependent the world has become on electricity.

Now, researchers have found radioactive atoms trapped within ice in Greenland that suggest an enormous proton storm struck Earth in about 660 B.C., one that might dwarf the Carrington Event.

Previous research found that extreme proton storms can generate radioactive atoms of beryllium-10, chlorine-36 and carbon-14 in the atmosphere. Evidence of such events is detectable in tree rings and ice cores, potentially giving scientists a way to investigate ancient solar activity.

The scientists examined ice from two core samples taken from Greenland. They noted a spike of radioactive beryllium-10 and chlorine-36 about 2,610 years ago. This matches prior work examining tree rings that suggested a spike of carbon-14 about the same time. [Photos: Craters Hidden Beneath the Greenland Ice Sheet]

Previous research detected two other ancient proton storms in a similar manner — one happened about A.D. 993-994, and the other about A.D. 774-775. The latter is the largest solar eruption known to date.

Regarding number of high-energy protons, the 660 B.C. and the A.D.
774-775 events are about 10 times larger than the strongest proton
storm seen in the modern day, which occurred in 1956, Muscheler said.
The A.D. 993-994 event was smaller than the other two ancient storms by
about a factor of two to three, he added.

https://www.livescience.com/ancient-solar-storm-solar-minimum

An extremely powerful solar storm pummeled our planet 9,200 years ago, leaving permanent scars on the ice buried deep below Greenland and Antarctica.

A new study of those ancient ice samples has found that this previously unknown storm is one of the strongest outbursts of solar weather ever detected and would have crippled modern communications systems if it had hit Earth today.

But perhaps most surprising, the massive storm appears to have hit during a solar minimum, the point during the sun's 11-year cycle when solar outbursts are typically much less common, according to the study, published Jan. 11 in the journal Nature Communications. Because of this unexpected discovery, the study researchers are concerned that devastating solar storms could hit when we least expect them — and that Earth might not be prepared when the next big one arrives.

"These enormous storms are currently not sufficiently included in risk
assessments," study co-author Raimund Muscheler, a geology researcher
at Lund University in Sweden, said in a statement. "It is of the utmost
importance to analyze what these events could mean for today's
technology and how we can protect ourselves."

On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 08:16:16 +1000
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:

> On 13/04/2024 8:02 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 07:52:58 +1000
> > Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >> On 13/04/2024 12:40 am, Phil Hendry's Chop shop wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:21:21 +1000
> >>> Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Excessive CO2 emissions are raising the
> >>>> temperature of the planet.
> >>>
> >>> Nope, not even slightly!
> >>>
> >>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm
> >>>
> >>> I have closely followed the carbon dioxide warming arguments. From
> >>> what I have learned of how the atmosphere ticks over 40 years of
> >>> study, I have been unable to convince myself that a doubling of
> >>> human-induced greenhouse gases can lead to anything but quite
> >>> small and insignificant amounts of global warming.
> >>>
> >>> The author is a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado where
> >>> he is an expert in tropical meteorology.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> **No. The DISCREDITED author is dead.
> >>
> >
> > 1. He was never "discredited" - rather the opposite in fact:
> >
> >
>
> **Not only has he been dead for many years,

Is Einstein still alive?

Have you dismissed his work too?

> but he was discredited for his dodgy climate science claims when he was alive.

By climate change hoaxers like you? It is to laugh.

Again, esteemed scientist:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_M._Gray

Throughout his career, Gray received multiple awards for his pioneering research and mentorship:

Fellow at the American Meteorological Society (AMS)
1992 – Colorado State University "Jack E. Cermak Graduate School Award for Outstanding Adviser
1993 – Co-recipient of the American Meteorological Society Banner I.. Miller Award
1993 – American Meteorological Society Jule G. Charney Award
1995 – Neil Frank Award of the National Hurricane Conference for "pioneering research into long-range hurricane forecasting and for developing a better understanding of how global climatological conditions shape the creation and intensity of tropical cyclones."
1995 – Honorary lifetime achievement award via invitation to the Eighth IMO Lecture to the 12th World Meteorological Organization Congress in Geneva, Switzerland.
1995 – ABC Television person of the week
1995 – Man of Science Award from the Colorado Chapter of the Achievement Rewards for College Scientists
2014 – first-ever recipient of the Robert and Joanne Simpson Award

Now do you see what flaming fucking asshole you are?

ESAD!