Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
By Monisha Ravisetti
published about 10 hours ago
After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible

On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:17:39 AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> By Monisha Ravisetti
> published about 10 hours ago
> After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible

According to Hansen, this solar maximum has been measured at an additional 0.1 W/m2 at Earth's surface. It just doesn't seem like much compared to the 1000 W/m2 quiescent, but the instrumentation has enough resolution to detect a very slight rise in global temperature because of it. I wouldn't expect it to have much effect. The Earth is so distant from the sun and subtends such a small intercept angle, the attenuation of fluctuation of sun's radiation is huge, apparently around 80 dB. The sun does make a difference with those seemingly focused ejections and so forth. It still remains the biggest source of electromagnetic interference by far on Earth.

On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 12:22:30 PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 9:30:42 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:17:39 AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > > Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> > > By Monisha Ravisetti
> > > published about 10 hours ago
> > > After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> > > https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
> > According to Hansen, this solar maximum has been measured at an additional 0.1 W/m2 at Earth's surface. It just doesn't seem like much compared to the 1000 W/m2 quiescent, but the instrumentation has enough resolution to detect a very slight rise in global temperature because of it. I wouldn't expect it to have much effect. The Earth is so distant from the sun and subtends such a small intercept angle, the attenuation of fluctuation of sun's radiation is huge, apparently around 80 dB. The sun does make a difference with those seemingly focused ejections and so forth. It still remains the biggest source of electromagnetic interference by far on Earth.
> Since light is a form of electromagnetic radiation, it's hard to argue with this claim.

Anyone who's worked with antennae reception knows to avoid having to point them anywhere near the sun. The noise floor/ temperature goes out of sight, and it's not light, it's solar EMI.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_temperature_(antenna)

>
> The problem with Neptune is that hard UV from the sum is causing photochemical reactions in Neptune's ammonia and methane atmosphere, so the clouds we see in its atmosphere are more likely to be the results of photochemical condensation than the purely thermal condensation that makes ours.
>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 1:23:54 PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 3:09:37 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 12:22:30 PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 9:30:42 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:17:39 AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > > > > Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> > > > > By Monisha Ravisetti
> > > > > published about 10 hours ago
> > > > > After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> > > > > https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
> > > > According to Hansen, this solar maximum has been measured at an additional 0.1 W/m2 at Earth's surface. It just doesn't seem like much compared to the 1000 W/m2 quiescent, but the instrumentation has enough resolution to detect a very slight rise in global temperature because of it. I wouldn't expect it to have much effect. The Earth is so distant from the sun and subtends such a small intercept angle, the attenuation of fluctuation of sun's radiation is huge, apparently around 80 dB. The sun does make a difference with those seemingly focused ejections and so forth. It still remains the biggest source of electromagnetic interference by far on Earth.
> > >
> > > Since light is a form of electromagnetic radiation, it's hard to argue with this claim.
> > Anyone who's worked with antennae reception knows to avoid having to point them anywhere near the sun. The noise floor/ temperature goes out of sight, and it's not light, it's solar EMI.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_temperature_(antenna)
> Light is definitely electromagnetic interference, but the people who talk about that are rather more specific about the interfering frequencies than you have been.
>
> The suns photosphere is a roughly black body radiator at about 6000K, but the solar corona, while thinner has much hotter spots which produce very hard UV, and magnetic fields and charged particles which produce intense lower frequency radiation
> > >
> > > The problem with Neptune is that hard UV from the sum is causing photochemical reactions in Neptune's ammonia and methane atmosphere, so the clouds we see in its atmosphere are more likely to be the results of photochemical condensation than the purely thermal condensation that makes ours.

The use of the term 'EMI', a very common term of electrical and electronics engineering, should have given it away.

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 07:17:29 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:

>Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
>By Monisha Ravisetti
>published about 10 hours ago
>After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible

That's terrible. We should send them Al Gore.

On a sunny day (Sat, 19 Aug 2023 07:22:30 -0700) it happened John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
<vvj1eilan8c67onr2m97mcfa2o8jvt9a6j@4ax.com>:

>On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 07:17:29 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>>Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
>>By Monisha Ravisetti
>>published about 10 hours ago
>>After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
>> https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
>
>That's terrible. We should send them Al Gore.

If you look at those pictures its amazing: no clouds are left in the present.
The effect of solar radiation on the upper atmosphere is interesting.
It does not make sense to just look at the low percentage change against total solar radiation
but you need to look at the type of radiation and what it does to the upper atmosphere (reflectivity, change chemical composition, etc).
We just over-estimate the human contribution to temperature changes.
I was just watching a science program on zdfinfo I think it was, about how Europe and America were once connected
and then how everything changed over millions of years.

Had to do things (pizza) so set a timer to record it, will watch the rest later,

Al Gore was just a salesman brainwashing kids with stories about polar bears...
So now everybody needs to buy a new electric car and all sorts of things ...

There used to be the 'Club of Rome' long ago that predicted the nd of humanity.
Something with oil ? LOL Business is
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_of_Rome
"The Club of Rome is a nonprofit, informal organization of intellectuals and business leaders whose goal is a c....."
So whats' new
there are religions too to control people, and get them to dance to the leaders tunes.

On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 3:41:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 3:38:34 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 1:23:54 PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 3:09:37 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 12:22:30 PM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 9:30:42 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:17:39 AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > > > > > > Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> > > > > > > By Monisha Ravisetti
> > > > > > > published about 10 hours ago
> > > > > > > After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> > > > > > > https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
> > > > > > According to Hansen, this solar maximum has been measured at an additional 0.1 W/m2 at Earth's surface. It just doesn't seem like much compared to the 1000 W/m2 quiescent, but the instrumentation has enough resolution to detect a very slight rise in global temperature because of it. I wouldn't expect it to have much effect. The Earth is so distant from the sun and subtends such a small intercept angle, the attenuation of fluctuation of sun's radiation is huge, apparently around 80 dB. The sun does make a difference with those seemingly focused ejections and so forth. It still remains the biggest source of electromagnetic interference by far on Earth.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since light is a form of electromagnetic radiation, it's hard to argue with this claim.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone who's worked with antennae reception knows to avoid having to point them anywhere near the sun. The noise floor/ temperature goes out of sight, and it's not light, it's solar EMI.
> > > >
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_temperature_(antenna)
> > > Light is definitely electromagnetic interference, but the people who talk about that are rather more specific about the interfering frequencies than you have been.
> > >
> > > The suns photosphere is a roughly black body radiator at about 6000K, but the solar corona, while thinner has much hotter spots which produce very hard UV, and magnetic fields and charged particles which produce intense lower frequency radiation
> > > > >
> > > > > The problem with Neptune is that hard UV from the sum is causing photochemical reactions in Neptune's ammonia and methane atmosphere, so the clouds we see in its atmosphere are more likely to be the results of photochemical condensation than the purely thermal condensation that makes ours.
> >
> > The use of the term 'EMI', a very common term of electrical and electronics engineering, should have given it away.
> But it is used by people who known what it means, and you clearly don't. The implication is always that it is electromagnetic inference at frequencies that matter in context under discussion. You failed to establish a context.

There you go again with the usual implication that what little you know is outsized profound, and everyone else is some struggling weakling intellect. Well, you have things in reverse as always. You have no idea of what I do or do not know about EMI.

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 14:57:26 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:

>On a sunny day (Sat, 19 Aug 2023 07:22:30 -0700) it happened John Larkin
><jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
><vvj1eilan8c67onr2m97mcfa2o8jvt9a6j@4ax.com>:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 07:17:29 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
>>>By Monisha Ravisetti
>>>published about 10 hours ago
>>>After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
>>> https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
>>
>>That's terrible. We should send them Al Gore.
>
>If you look at those pictures its amazing: no clouds are left in the present.
>The effect of solar radiation on the upper atmosphere is interesting.

Solar wind probably matters too, particles vs photons. The particles
will have years of time lag that far away. Interstellar particles
matter too.

I wonder if the sun has 1/f noise in its various emissions.

>It does not make sense to just look at the low percentage change against total solar radiation
>but you need to look at the type of radiation and what it does to the upper atmosphere (reflectivity, change chemical composition, etc).
>We just over-estimate the human contribution to temperature changes.

For sure.

>I was just watching a science program on zdfinfo I think it was, about how Europe and America were once connected
>and then how everything changed over millions of years.
>
>Had to do things (pizza) so set a timer to record it, will watch the rest later,
>
>Al Gore was just a salesman brainwashing kids with stories about polar bears...
>So now everybody needs to buy a new electric car and all sorts of things ...
>
>There used to be the 'Club of Rome' long ago that predicted the nd of humanity.
>Something with oil ? LOL Business is
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_of_Rome
> "The Club of Rome is a nonprofit, informal organization of intellectuals and business leaders whose goal is a c....."
>So whats' new
> there are religions too to control people, and get them to dance to the leaders tunes.

On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 8:57:50 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 12:57:34 AM UTC+10, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > On a sunny day (Sat, 19 Aug 2023 07:22:30 -0700) it happened John Larkin
> > <jla...@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
> > <vvj1eilan8c67onr2...@4ax.com>:
> > >On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 07:17:29 GMT, Jan Panteltje <al...@comet.invalid>
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >>Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> > >>By Monisha Ravisetti
> > >>published about 10 hours ago
> > >>After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> > >> https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
> > >
> > >That's terrible. We should send them Al Gore.
> >
> > If you look at those pictures its amazing: no clouds are left in the present.
> > The effect of solar radiation on the upper atmosphere is interesting.
> But it is a rather different atmosphere on Neptune.
> > It does not make sense to just look at the low percentage change against total solar radiation
> > but you need to look at the type of radiation and what it does to the upper atmosphere (reflectivity, change chemical composition, etc).
> >
> > We just over-estimate the human contribution to temperature changes.
> The fossil carbon extraction industry funds a lot of climate change denial propaganda that claims this. It's not a remote;ly credible claim.
> > I was just watching a science program on zdfinfo I think it was, about how Europe and America were once connected and then how everything changed over millions of years.
> It's all about continental drift, which is still going on and we are now measuring it.
> > Had to do things (pizza) so set a timer to record it, will watch the rest later,
> >
> > Al Gore was just a salesman brainwashing kids with stories about polar bears...
> That's what the climate change denial propaganda machine would like you to think. Al Gore had rather less control over the film that got made than he had over the book he wrote. Film-makers like sentimental images - they sell films. In reality Al Gore was a rather good science populariser.

HELLO BOZO, I AM NOT a "climate denier", I AM a climate realist. You climate change fanatics CAN'T establish a direct link between CO2 and global warming, let alone climate change. I have asked you to do this and you HAVE FAILED!!!

> > So now everybody needs to buy a new electric car and all sorts of things ...
> They should, in the long term. The longer they delay, the worse the climate will get, but trying to stop burning fossil carbon right now would make an even worse mess.

Which EV did YOU buy, Bozo?

<snip more of Bozo's bullshit>

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 12:51:03 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 8:57:50 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 12:57:34 AM UTC+10, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > > On a sunny day (Sat, 19 Aug 2023 07:22:30 -0700) it happened John Larkin
> > > <jla...@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
> > > <vvj1eilan8c67onr2...@4ax.com>:
> > > >On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 07:17:29 GMT, Jan Panteltje <al...@comet.invalid>
> > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> > > >>By Monisha Ravisetti
> > > >>published about 10 hours ago
> > > >>After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> > > >> https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
> > > >
> > > >That's terrible. We should send them Al Gore.
> > >
> > > If you look at those pictures its amazing: no clouds are left in the present.
> > > The effect of solar radiation on the upper atmosphere is interesting.
> >
> > But it is a rather different atmosphere on Neptune.
> >
> > > It does not make sense to just look at the low percentage change against total solar radiation
> > > but you need to look at the type of radiation and what it does to the upper atmosphere (reflectivity, change chemical composition, etc).
> > >
> > > We just over-estimate the human contribution to temperature changes.
> >
> > The fossil carbon extraction industry funds a lot of climate change denial propaganda that claims this. It's not a remotely credible claim.
> >
> > > I was just watching a science program on zdfinfo I think it was, about how Europe and America were once connected and then how everything changed over millions of years.
> > It's all about continental drift, which is still going on and we are now measuring it.
> >
> > > Had to do things (pizza) so set a timer to record it, will watch the rest later,
> > >
> > > Al Gore was just a salesman brainwashing kids with stories about polar bears...
> >
> > That's what the climate change denial propaganda machine would like you to think. Al Gore had rather less control over the film that got made than he had over the book he wrote. Film-makers like sentimental images - they sell films. In reality Al Gore was a rather good science populariser.
>
> HELLO BOZO, I AM NOT a "climate denier", I AM a climate realist.

That is what you like to think. It's obvious nonsense.

> You climate change fanatics CAN'T establish a direct link between CO2 and global warming, let alone climate change. I have asked you to do this and you HAVE FAILED!!!

Granting your ignorance and stupidity, dumbing down the explanation to one that you could follow would be a heroic task. Since you don't want to admit how ignorant and stupid you are, you wouldn't admit that you were wrong even after we'd tied you down and made you sit through the entire explanation.

The logic is actually pretty simple. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, for the earth to radiate away the heat it absorbs from the sun, the re-radiating layer has to be at -18C,
That effective radiating altitude is a few kilometres about the solid or liquid surface of the earth. Since the atmosphere has a lapse rate - it gets cooler as you go higher - the surface we live on is warmer than -18C. More CO2 in the atmosphere pushes the re-radiating layer a bit higher, so the surface we live on gets a bit warmer. End of story.

> > > So now everybody needs to buy a new electric car and all sorts of things ...
> >
> > They should, in the long term. The longer they delay, the worse the climate will get, but trying to stop burning fossil carbon right now would make an even worse mess.
>
> Which EV did YOU buy, Bozo?

I haven't got around to that yet. The gasoline burning car I've got is 12 years old, and I use it very little. I can wait a bit longer.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Friday, 18 August 2023 at 09:17:39 UTC+2, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> By Monisha Ravisetti
> published about 10 hours ago
> After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.

Who cares Neptune, as NASA Citizen Scientist I have joined a number of r&d projects by NASA

I have joined every team world-wide, calculating number of sunspots
and number of sunspots is not a real number but fake Wolf Number multiplying the real number of sunspots by 10
to make geriatrics to grow on popularity, publishing fake n umber of sunspots,
i.e. 15 is the real number, as seen by Rudolf Wolf in the past and as seen and calculated by few sun observatories
and what is published is 150 sunspots fake Wolf Number

Sunspots cycle fake originated from Swiss and is funded by some agencies to sell CO2 emissions to make easy $Bs by doing nothing.

Swiss is low science, IPCC is no science, UN SIDS agency is no science, UNFCC is no sciece, populated by CO2 lobbyists

So solar cycles are all about fake since generated and calculated by delusional observers, multiplying the real number of sunspots by 10.

Short term 6-12 month climate changes are due to fluctuations in solar activity and can be easily verified by everyone, since data are live available from satellite telescopes

So there are few only real scientists in real climate business
and No.1 is 2021 Water Cycle Nobelist from Japan, living at Princeton.

Unfortunately his email is locked, his phone is locked, his webpage has been crashed to keep him closed against the world

Basing on his Nobel R&D Papers, #H2O vapor is the only greenhouse gas
and CO2 has never been a greenhouse gas which matters, fake sold by Al Gore, Prof. Mann, IPCC, UNFCC , UN SIDS teams
to make easy $Bs, selling delusional fake for years

>

Darius the Dumb has posted yet one more #veryStupidByLowIQaa article.

On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 8:16:45 AM UTC+10, a a wrote:
> On Friday, 18 August 2023 at 09:17:39 UTC+2, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> > By Monisha Ravisetti
> > published about 10 hours ago
> > After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
>
> Who cares Neptune, as NASA Citizen Scientist I have joined a number of r&d projects by NASA

A a is citizen half-wit. He can volunteer his meagre abilities for all he is worth, but he isn't a scientist's bootlace.
> I have joined every team world-wide, calculating number of sunspots and number of sunspots is not a real number but fake Wolf Number multiplying the real number of sunspots by 10
to make geriatrics to grow on popularity, publishing fake n umber of sunspots, i.e. 15 is the real number, as seen by Rudolf Wolf in the past and as seen and calculated by few sun observatories and what is published is 150 sunspots fake Wolf Number

The sun takes 25 days to rotate at it's equator and 36 days at it's poles. We can only count the sunspots we can see on the area directly facing us, which is rather less than all of them.

We've put artificial satellites into orbit around the sun, but not - so far - enough of them to get a better number.

> Sunspots cycle fake originated from Swiss and is funded by some agencies to sell CO2 emissions to make easy $Bs by doing nothing.

It started in Zurich in 1848. It certainly wasn't fake when it started up, and nobody sane thinks that it is now,
> Swiss is low science, IPCC is no science, UN SIDS agency is no science, UNFCC is no sciece, populated by CO2 lobbyists

A a's ideas about science are comically ignorant. He seems to get them from climate change denial propaganda, which is aimed at gullible twits.
> So solar cycles are all about fake since generated and calculated by delusional observers, multiplying the real number of sunspots by 10.

Or so a a likes to think.,
> Short term 6-12 month climate changes are due to fluctuations in solar activity and can be easily verified by everyone, since data are live available from satellite telescopes.

They aren't. The short term stuff is mostly due to ocean current moving around. The alternation between El Nino and La Nina has been known about for quite a while, but the Multidecadal Atlantic Oscillation was on,ly named in 2000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_multidecadal_oscillation.

There are others. Fluctatuations in solar activity are small and don't have much effect.

> So there are few only real scientists in real climate business and No.1 is 2021 Water Cycle Nobelist from Japan, living at Princeton.
>
> Unfortunately his email is locked, his phone is locked, his webpage has been crashed to keep him closed against the world
>
> Basing on his Nobel R&D Papers, #H2O vapor is the only greenhouse gas

But you can't provide any links to them, and clearly haven't got a clue what they mean,

> and CO2 has never been a greenhouse gas which matters, fake sold by Al Gore, Prof. Mann, IPCC, UNFCC , UN SIDS teams to make easy $Bs, selling delusional fake for years.

That is what the climate change denial propaganda machine seems to want to claim. It's fatuous nonsense, but their propganda has to be aimed at gullible twits - nobody else could take it seriously - and it gets recycled by gullible twits.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 11:36:30 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 12:51:03 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 8:57:50 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 12:57:34 AM UTC+10, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > > > On a sunny day (Sat, 19 Aug 2023 07:22:30 -0700) it happened John Larkin
> > > > <jla...@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
> > > > <vvj1eilan8c67onr2...@4ax.com>:
> > > > >On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 07:17:29 GMT, Jan Panteltje <al...@comet.invalid>
> > > > >wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> > > > >>By Monisha Ravisetti
> > > > >>published about 10 hours ago
> > > > >>After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> > > > >> https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
> > > > >
> > > > >That's terrible. We should send them Al Gore.
> > > >
> > > > If you look at those pictures its amazing: no clouds are left in the present.
> > > > The effect of solar radiation on the upper atmosphere is interesting.
> > >
> > > But it is a rather different atmosphere on Neptune.
> > >
> > > > It does not make sense to just look at the low percentage change against total solar radiation
> > > > but you need to look at the type of radiation and what it does to the upper atmosphere (reflectivity, change chemical composition, etc).
> > > >
> > > > We just over-estimate the human contribution to temperature changes..
> > >
> > > The fossil carbon extraction industry funds a lot of climate change denial propaganda that claims this. It's not a remotely credible claim.
> > >
> > > > I was just watching a science program on zdfinfo I think it was, about how Europe and America were once connected and then how everything changed over millions of years.
> > > It's all about continental drift, which is still going on and we are now measuring it.
> > >
> > > > Had to do things (pizza) so set a timer to record it, will watch the rest later,
> > > >
> > > > Al Gore was just a salesman brainwashing kids with stories about polar bears...
> > >
> > > That's what the climate change denial propaganda machine would like you to think. Al Gore had rather less control over the film that got made than he had over the book he wrote. Film-makers like sentimental images - they sell films. In reality Al Gore was a rather good science populariser.
> >
> > HELLO BOZO, I AM NOT a "climate denier", I AM a climate realist.
> That is what you like to think. It's obvious nonsense.
> > You climate change fanatics CAN'T establish a direct link between CO2 and global warming, let alone climate change. I have asked you to do this and you HAVE FAILED!!!
> Granting your ignorance and stupidity, dumbing down the explanation to one that you could follow would be a heroic task. Since you don't want to admit how ignorant and stupid you are, you wouldn't admit that you were wrong even after we'd tied you down and made you sit through the entire explanation.
>
> The logic is actually pretty simple. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, for the earth to radiate away the heat it absorbs from the sun, the re-radiating layer has to be at -18C,
> That effective radiating altitude is a few kilometres about the solid or liquid surface of the earth. Since the atmosphere has a lapse rate - it gets cooler as you go higher - the surface we live on is warmer than -18C. More CO2 in the atmosphere pushes the re-radiating layer a bit higher, so the surface we live on gets a bit warmer. End of story.

Hey Bozo, that is the end of YOUR story, which is COMPLETELY UNCONVINCING. There is just an allegory, a story that you, and the likes of you, are telling to convince yourselves that there is something there. No experiments, no energy balance equations, no data to back it up, no NOTHING!

> > > > So now everybody needs to buy a new electric car and all sorts of things ...
> > >
> > > They should, in the long term. The longer they delay, the worse the climate will get, but trying to stop burning fossil carbon right now would make an even worse mess.
> >
> > Which EV did YOU buy, Bozo?
> I haven't got around to that yet. The gasoline burning car I've got is 12 years old, and I use it very little. I can wait a bit longer.

Just as I thought: you are telling everybody else what they need to do, but you WON'T do it yourself. You know what this is called? I will tell you: you are a HYPOCRITE!
>
> --
> Bozo Bill Slowman, Sydney

On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 4:24:09 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 11:36:30 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 12:51:03 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 8:57:50 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 12:57:34 AM UTC+10, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > > > > On a sunny day (Sat, 19 Aug 2023 07:22:30 -0700) it happened John Larkin
> > > > > <jla...@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
> > > > > <vvj1eilan8c67onr2...@4ax.com>:
> > > > > >On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 07:17:29 GMT, Jan Panteltje <al...@comet.invalid>
> > > > > >wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> > > > > >>By Monisha Ravisetti
> > > > > >>published about 10 hours ago
> > > > > >>After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> > > > > >> https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
> > > > > >
> > > > > >That's terrible. We should send them Al Gore.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you look at those pictures its amazing: no clouds are left in the present.
> > > > > The effect of solar radiation on the upper atmosphere is interesting.
> > > >
> > > > But it is a rather different atmosphere on Neptune.
> > > >
> > > > > It does not make sense to just look at the low percentage change against total solar radiation
> > > > > but you need to look at the type of radiation and what it does to the upper atmosphere (reflectivity, change chemical composition, etc).
> > > > >
> > > > > We just over-estimate the human contribution to temperature changes.
> > > >
> > > > The fossil carbon extraction industry funds a lot of climate change denial propaganda that claims this. It's not a remotely credible claim.
> > > >
> > > > > I was just watching a science program on zdfinfo I think it was, about how Europe and America were once connected and then how everything changed over millions of years.
> > > > It's all about continental drift, which is still going on and we are now measuring it.
> > > >
> > > > > Had to do things (pizza) so set a timer to record it, will watch the rest later,
> > > > >
> > > > > Al Gore was just a salesman brainwashing kids with stories about polar bears...
> > > >
> > > > That's what the climate change denial propaganda machine would like you to think. Al Gore had rather less control over the film that got made than he had over the book he wrote. Film-makers like sentimental images - they sell films. In reality Al Gore was a rather good science populariser.
> > >
> > > HELLO BOZO, I AM NOT a "climate denier", I AM a climate realist.
> > That is what you like to think. It's obvious nonsense.
> > > You climate change fanatics CAN'T establish a direct link between CO2 and global warming, let alone climate change. I have asked you to do this and you HAVE FAILED!!!
> > Granting your ignorance and stupidity, dumbing down the explanation to one that you could follow would be a heroic task. Since you don't want to admit how ignorant and stupid you are, you wouldn't admit that you were wrong even after we'd tied you down and made you sit through the entire explanation.
> >
> > The logic is actually pretty simple. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, for the earth to radiate away the heat it absorbs from the sun, the re-radiating layer has to be at -18C,
> > That effective radiating altitude is a few kilometres about the solid or liquid surface of the earth. Since the atmosphere has a lapse rate - it gets cooler as you go higher - the surface we live on is warmer than -18C. More CO2 in the atmosphere pushes the re-radiating layer a bit higher, so the surface we live on gets a bit warmer. End of story.
> Hey Bozo, that is the end of YOUR story, which is COMPLETELY UNCONVINCING.. There is just an allegory, a story that you, and the likes of you, are telling to convince yourselves that there is something there. No experiments, no energy balance equations, no data to back it up, no NOTHING!
> > > > > So now everybody needs to buy a new electric car and all sorts of things ...
> > > >
> > > > They should, in the long term. The longer they delay, the worse the climate will get, but trying to stop burning fossil carbon right now would make an even worse mess.
> > >
> > > Which EV did YOU buy, Bozo?
>
> > I haven't got around to that yet. The gasoline burning car I've got is 12 years old, and I use it very little. I can wait a bit longer.
>
> Just as I thought: you are telling everybody else what they need to do, but you WON'T do it yourself.

I don't tell people that they need to buy an electric car now - for one thing it won't make all that much difference until the generation system has moved close to 100% renewables.

In the long term we've all got to go there, but it isn't physically possible to do it all at once.

> You know what this is called? I will tell you: you are a HYPOCRITE!

It isn't. The word you should have been looking for is "realist". It isn't loaded enough to serve your purpose, which is childish abuse. It looks as if you are too dim to realise that you come across as an obnoxious idiot, and my pointing it out to you is pretty much a waste of time, but other people may get the message.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 4:44:09 AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 4:24:09 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 11:36:30 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 12:51:03 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 8:57:50 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 12:57:34 AM UTC+10, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > > > > > On a sunny day (Sat, 19 Aug 2023 07:22:30 -0700) it happened John Larkin
> > > > > > <jla...@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
> > > > > > <vvj1eilan8c67onr2...@4ax.com>:
> > > > > > >On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 07:17:29 GMT, Jan Panteltje <al...@comet.invalid>
> > > > > > >wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >>Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> > > > > > >>By Monisha Ravisetti
> > > > > > >>published about 10 hours ago
> > > > > > >>After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> > > > > > >> https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >That's terrible. We should send them Al Gore.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you look at those pictures its amazing: no clouds are left in the present.
> > > > > > The effect of solar radiation on the upper atmosphere is interesting.
> > > > >
> > > > > But it is a rather different atmosphere on Neptune.
> > > > >
> > > > > > It does not make sense to just look at the low percentage change against total solar radiation
> > > > > > but you need to look at the type of radiation and what it does to the upper atmosphere (reflectivity, change chemical composition, etc).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We just over-estimate the human contribution to temperature changes.
> > > > >
> > > > > The fossil carbon extraction industry funds a lot of climate change denial propaganda that claims this. It's not a remotely credible claim.
> > > > >
> > > > > > I was just watching a science program on zdfinfo I think it was, about how Europe and America were once connected and then how everything changed over millions of years.
> > > > > It's all about continental drift, which is still going on and we are now measuring it.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Had to do things (pizza) so set a timer to record it, will watch the rest later,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Al Gore was just a salesman brainwashing kids with stories about polar bears...
> > > > >
> > > > > That's what the climate change denial propaganda machine would like you to think. Al Gore had rather less control over the film that got made than he had over the book he wrote. Film-makers like sentimental images - they sell films. In reality Al Gore was a rather good science populariser.
> > > >
> > > > HELLO BOZO, I AM NOT a "climate denier", I AM a climate realist.
> > > That is what you like to think. It's obvious nonsense.
> > > > You climate change fanatics CAN'T establish a direct link between CO2 and global warming, let alone climate change. I have asked you to do this and you HAVE FAILED!!!
> > > Granting your ignorance and stupidity, dumbing down the explanation to one that you could follow would be a heroic task. Since you don't want to admit how ignorant and stupid you are, you wouldn't admit that you were wrong even after we'd tied you down and made you sit through the entire explanation.
> > >
> > > The logic is actually pretty simple. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, for the earth to radiate away the heat it absorbs from the sun, the re-radiating layer has to be at -18C,
> > > That effective radiating altitude is a few kilometres about the solid or liquid surface of the earth. Since the atmosphere has a lapse rate - it gets cooler as you go higher - the surface we live on is warmer than -18C. More CO2 in the atmosphere pushes the re-radiating layer a bit higher, so the surface we live on gets a bit warmer. End of story.
> > Hey Bozo, that is the end of YOUR story, which is COMPLETELY UNCONVINCING. There is just an allegory, a story that you, and the likes of you, are telling to convince yourselves that there is something there. No experiments, no energy balance equations, no data to back it up, no NOTHING!
> > > > > > So now everybody needs to buy a new electric car and all sorts of things ...
> > > > >
> > > > > They should, in the long term. The longer they delay, the worse the climate will get, but trying to stop burning fossil carbon right now would make an even worse mess.
> > > >
> > > > Which EV did YOU buy, Bozo?
> >
> > > I haven't got around to that yet. The gasoline burning car I've got is 12 years old, and I use it very little. I can wait a bit longer.
> >
> > Just as I thought: you are telling everybody else what they need to do, but you WON'T do it yourself.
> I don't tell people that they need to buy an electric car now - for one thing it won't make all that much difference until the generation system has moved close to 100% renewables.
>
> In the long term we've all got to go there, but it isn't physically possible to do it all at once.
> > You know what this is called? I will tell you: you are a HYPOCRITE!
> It isn't. The word you should have been looking for is "realist". It isn't loaded enough to serve your purpose, which is childish abuse. It looks as if you are too dim to realise that you come across as an obnoxious idiot, and my pointing it out to you is pretty much a waste of time, but other people may get the message.
>
> --
> Bozo Bill Slowman, Sydney

Hey Bozo, you ARE a hypocrite, telling everybody else what to do, but not doing it yourself. Others call you an "asshole", another version of a "realist." And as far as the "idiot" part goes that would definitely apply to anybody that thinks that NUKING and FIREBOMBING their OWN COUNTRY is a fucking good idea.

On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:48:14 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 4:44:09 AM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 4:24:09 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 11:36:30 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 12:51:03 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 8:57:50 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 12:57:34 AM UTC+10, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > > > > > > On a sunny day (Sat, 19 Aug 2023 07:22:30 -0700) it happened John Larkin
> > > > > > > <jla...@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote in
> > > > > > > <vvj1eilan8c67onr2...@4ax.com>:
> > > > > > > >On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 07:17:29 GMT, Jan Panteltje <al...@comet..invalid>
> > > > > > > >wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >>Neptune's clouds have vanished, and the sun may be to blame (video)
> > > > > > > >>By Monisha Ravisetti
> > > > > > > >>published about 10 hours ago
> > > > > > > >>After analyzing 30 years of data, scientists came to a surprising conclusion about an ice giant in our solar system.
> > > > > > > >> https://www.space.com/neptune-clouds-vanish-solar-activity-responsible
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >That's terrible. We should send them Al Gore.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you look at those pictures its amazing: no clouds are left in the present.
> > > > > > > The effect of solar radiation on the upper atmosphere is interesting.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But it is a rather different atmosphere on Neptune.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > It does not make sense to just look at the low percentage change against total solar radiation
> > > > > > > but you need to look at the type of radiation and what it does to the upper atmosphere (reflectivity, change chemical composition, etc).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We just over-estimate the human contribution to temperature changes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The fossil carbon extraction industry funds a lot of climate change denial propaganda that claims this. It's not a remotely credible claim..
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I was just watching a science program on zdfinfo I think it was, about how Europe and America were once connected and then how everything changed over millions of years.
> > > > > > It's all about continental drift, which is still going on and we are now measuring it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Had to do things (pizza) so set a timer to record it, will watch the rest later,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Al Gore was just a salesman brainwashing kids with stories about polar bears...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's what the climate change denial propaganda machine would like you to think. Al Gore had rather less control over the film that got made than he had over the book he wrote. Film-makers like sentimental images - they sell films. In reality Al Gore was a rather good science populariser.
> > > > >
> > > > > I AM NOT a "climate denier", I AM a climate realist.
> > > >
> > > > That is what you like to think. It's obvious nonsense.
> > > >
> > > > > You climate change fanatics CAN'T establish a direct link between CO2 and global warming, let alone climate change. I have asked you to do this and you HAVE FAILED!!!
> > > >
> > > > Granting your ignorance and stupidity, dumbing down the explanation to one that you could follow would be a heroic task. Since you don't want to admit how ignorant and stupid you are, you wouldn't admit that you were wrong even after we'd tied you down and made you sit through the entire explanation.
> > > >
> > > > The logic is actually pretty simple. As Joseph Fourier worked out in 1824, for the earth to radiate away the heat it absorbs from the sun, the re-radiating layer has to be at -18C,
> > > > That effective radiating altitude is a few kilometres about the solid or liquid surface of the earth. Since the atmosphere has a lapse rate - it gets cooler as you go higher - the surface we live on is warmer than -18C. More CO2 in the atmosphere pushes the re-radiating layer a bit higher, so the surface we live on gets a bit warmer. End of story.
> > >
> > > Hey Bozo, that is the end of YOUR story, which is COMPLETELY UNCONVINCING.

So you couldn't understand it. Why am I not surprised.

> > > There is just an allegory, a story that you, and the likes of you, are telling to convince yourselves that there is something there. No experiments, no energy balance equations, no data to back it up, no NOTHING!

There is an enormous volume of scientific observations that backs it up in volumious detail. We've got satellites measuring air temperature at various levels in the atmosphere that does spell it out in detail.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/06/30/corrected-satellite-data-show-30-percent-increase-in-global-warming-matching-surface-data/

Spencer and Christy who run the program, are born-again Christians with an irrational aversion to climate change and they were reluctant to correct errors in their data which supported the denialist point of view, but eventually realised that they'd have to overcome their reluctance.

> > > > > > > So now everybody needs to buy a new electric car and all sorts of things ...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > They should, in the long term. The longer they delay, the worse the climate will get, but trying to stop burning fossil carbon right now would make an even worse mess.
> > > > >
> > > > > Which EV did YOU buy, Bozo?
> > >
> > > > I haven't got around to that yet. The gasoline burning car I've got is 12 years old, and I use it very little. I can wait a bit longer.
> > >
> > > Just as I thought: you are telling everybody else what they need to do, but you WON'T do it yourself.
> >
> > I don't tell people that they need to buy an electric car now - for one thing it won't make all that much difference until the generation system has moved close to 100% renewables.
> >
> > In the long term we've all got to go there, but it isn't physically possible to do it all at once.
> >
> > > You know what this is called? I will tell you: you are a HYPOCRITE!
> >
> > It isn't. The word you should have been looking for is "realist". It isn't loaded enough to serve your purpose, which is childish abuse. It looks as if you are too dim to realise that you come across as an obnoxious idiot, and my pointing it out to you is pretty much a waste of time, but other people may get the message.
>
> Hey you ARE a hypocrite, telling everybody else what to do, but not doing it yourself.

Except that I didn't tell anybody to do that - a minor detail that you seem happy to lie about.

> Others call you an "asshole"

Cite?

> , another version of a "realist".

You won't find that equation in any dictionary. You fit the definition better, since you do post a lot of shit.

> And as far as the "idiot" part goes that would definitely apply to anybody that thinks that NUKING and FIREBOMBING their OWN COUNTRY is a fucking good idea.

Again, I don't. That's your deluded misreading of what I actually posted, which is available, but which you don't bother quoting because your deluded misrepresentation of it suits your lying rhetoric better.

--
Bil Sloman, Sydney

Flyguy wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 11:36:30 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman
> wrote:
>> > Which EV did YOU buy, Bozo?
>> I haven't got around to that yet. The gasoline burning car I've got is 12
>> years old, and I use it very little. I can wait a bit longer.
>
> Just as I thought: you are telling everybody else what they need to do, but
> you WON'T do it yourself. You know what this is called? I will tell you: you
> are a HYPOCRITE!

Prematurely getting rid of an intact vehicle to buy a new one is even less
sustainable than waiting for it to break.

Of course, encapsulating yourself in two tons of metal, plastics, and
electronics to get around can't ever be sustainable, no matter how the thing is
powered.

On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 1:40:17 AM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
> Flyguy wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 11:36:30 PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman
> > wrote:
> >> > Which EV did YOU buy, Bozo?
> >> I haven't got around to that yet. The gasoline burning car I've got is 12
> >> years old, and I use it very little. I can wait a bit longer.
> >
> > Just as I thought: you are telling everybody else what they need to do, but
> > you WON'T do it yourself. You know what this is called? I will tell you: you
> > are a HYPOCRITE!
>
> Prematurely getting rid of an intact vehicle to buy a new one is even less
> sustainable than waiting for it to break.
>
> Of course, encapsulating yourself in two tons of metal, plastics, and
> electronics to get around can't ever be sustainable, no matter how the thing is
> powered.

My Merc 180B only weighs one ton. Sustainable just means that you can keep on doing it indefinitely, and there's no particular reason to imagine that an electric car couldn't be recycled indefinitely.

Reducing the parts to their original elements and putting them back together does take energy, but the while the sun has a finite life-time we'll have probably found some other energy source before it gets to be unusable.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 1:40:17 AM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
>> Prematurely getting rid of an intact vehicle to buy a new one is even less
>> sustainable than waiting for it to break.
>>
>> Of course, encapsulating yourself in two tons of metal, plastics, and
>> electronics to get around can't ever be sustainable, no matter how the thing
>> is powered.
>
> My Merc 180B only weighs one ton. Sustainable just means that you can keep on
> doing it indefinitely, and there's no particular reason to imagine that an
> electric car couldn't be recycled indefinitely.

With the exception of some bulk (!) metals and maybe the glass there is exactly
nothing in a card that could be recycled indefinetely. Of course for each
component one could concoct some theoretical process to do it, but hardly any
of them would become economically feasible before the Earth is essentially void
of all natural resources.

> Reducing the parts to their original elements and putting them back together
> does take energy,

Yeah. So far it's only economically feasible for very few simple items, like
glass, steel, copper, aluminium and maybe some other metals. Polymers,
electronics, batteries: nada

On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 8:13:06 PM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
> Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 1:40:17 AM UTC+10, Robert Latest wrote:
> >> Prematurely getting rid of an intact vehicle to buy a new one is even less
> >> sustainable than waiting for it to break.
> >>
> >> Of course, encapsulating yourself in two tons of metal, plastics, and
> >> electronics to get around can't ever be sustainable, no matter how the thing
> >> is powered.
> >
> > My Merc 180B only weighs one ton. Sustainable just means that you can keep on
> > doing it indefinitely, and there's no particular reason to imagine that an
> > electric car couldn't be recycled indefinitely.
>
> With the exception of some bulk (!) metals and maybe the glass there is exactly
> nothing in a car that could be recycled indefinitely.

Exactly?

<snipped the rest of the pretended expertise.>

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney