quote:

Originally posted by Mike English:

quote:

Science" (AAAS) is one of, if not the most, prestigious general hard science journals on the face of the planet.

According to you...........

Why yes Sir, me and just about anyone with enough smarts to come in out of the rain. Guess that leaves you out, hhmmm?

Try this "prestigious science journals", see what you get.

Hell, "Science" has only been around since 1880.

Science 8 October 2010:
Vol. 330. no. 6001, pp. 192 - 196
DOI: 10.1126/science.1186120

Review

The Evolution and Future of Earth’s Nitrogen Cycle

Donald E. Canfield,1,* Alexander N. Glazer,2 Paul G. Falkowski3

Atmospheric reactions and slow geological processes controlled Earth’s earliest nitrogen cycle, and by ~2.7 billion years ago, a linked suite of microbial processes evolved to form the modern nitrogen cycle with robust natural feedbacks and controls. Over the past century, however, the development of new agricultural practices to satisfy a growing global demand for food has drastically disrupted the nitrogen cycle. This has led to extensive eutrophication of fresh waters and coastal zones as well as increased inventories of the potent greenhouse gas nitrous oxide (N2O). Microbial processes will ultimately restore balance to the nitrogen cycle, but the damage done by humans to the nitrogen economy of the planet will persist for decades, possibly centuries, if active intervention and careful management strategies are not initiated.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/...bstract/330/6001/192

More good reading.

As little man larry heathen passes off some more whackado anti-capitalist environmentalist gibberish as "SCIENCE"!
Sad that little man larry heathen is so gullible he swallows all of this bull shyt whole!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First it as Carbon-Monoxide being emitted from tailpipes. When they realized that the amount of CO being emitted from tailpipes was such a miniscule percentage of the overall CO present in the atmosphere and that the current levels were consistent with those from samples for eons past, they had to find a new boogie man.

Enter Carbon-Dioxide! They jumped on CO2 because it makes up a large percentage of the atmosphere. Never mind that all life on earth basically depends on CO2! No, CO2 is bad!!

Looks like they need a new boogie man now so they are moving on to N2O!?!?

quote:

Originally posted by stanman:
First it as Carbon-Monoxide being emitted from tailpipes. When they realized that the amount of CO being emitted from tailpipes was such a miniscule percentage of the overall CO present in the atmosphere and that the current levels were consistent with those from samples for eons past, they had to find a new boogie man.

Enter Carbon-Dioxide! They jumped on CO2 because it makes up a large percentage of the atmosphere. Never mind that all life on earth basically depends on CO2! No, CO2 is bad!!

Looks like they need a new boogie man now so they are moving on to N2O!?!?

Ain't it the truth!!!

This imformation must have came from the new muslim division of NASA!

The sky is falling!!! The sky is falling!!!

quote:

Originally posted by stanman:
First it as Carbon-Monoxide being emitted from tailpipes. When they realized that the amount of CO being emitted from tailpipes was such a miniscule percentage of the overall CO present in the atmosphere and that the current levels were consistent with those from samples for eons past, they had to find a new boogie man.

Enter Carbon-Dioxide! They jumped on CO2 because it makes up a large percentage of the atmosphere. Never mind that all life on earth basically depends on CO2! No, CO2 is bad!!

Looks like they need a new boogie man now so they are moving on to N2O!?!?

Ahhh yes, pretty much as I expected, people who don't or choose not to even try to understand, anything, ever. Closed minded doesn't even begin to describe many around here.

I don't see anyone here trying to provide sources of creditable information that disputes the specifics of either of the two abstracts I posted. Or even ask to see the whole article for that matter. Again these are from the most prestigious hard science journal on the planet. Guys you make it very hard for me not to use offensive language to describe your apparent diminished mental capacities, with regard to the actual use of reason.

Ok, so Greg, where and when was it ever published that "Carbon Monoxide" coming out of tail pipes was ever the be all end all of the greenhouse effect? Particularly given the fact that water vapor and CO2 have been considered the two primary Green House Gases (GHGs) since they were discovered as the prime drivers of the Greenhouse effect by Joseph Fourier around 1825. That name ring a bell with you Greg? The greenhouse effect was experimentally confirmed by John Tyndall in the 1860's and quantified by Svante Arrhenius in the late 1890's. Humans have known about this stuff for well over 100 years.

Current science and in particular the abstract for the article I posted states water vapor accounts for roughly 50% of earth's greenhouse effect, cloud cover adds about another 25% and CO2 another 20%, and the rest is produced via the other GHGs, 03 (ozone), N20, CH4, CFCs and other aerosols. The point of the article is that water vapor is highly mobile entering and leaving the atmosphere very quickly via evaporation, condensation and precipitation. The other GHGs are not like this, once in the atmosphere they stay there, some for a damn long time, in the case of CO2 hundreds of years. CO2 being the GHG that causes most potent effect for the smallest change in amount. Think of CO2 as low voltage control circuit that controls a high power high voltage circuit. Change the CO2 control circuit one volt and you change the power circuit 100 volts.

It's not as if CO2 is a bad thing in and of itself, but just like everything else only in moderation, sh1t if we didn't have, "SOME", in the atmosphere the damn planet would be nearly a solid frozen ball of ice, ever hear of something called "Snow Ball Earth"? Right now about 30 to 35 degrees "Celsius" of our average yearly surface temperature comes from CO2 modulated greenhouse effect. Take it, CO2, all out of our atmosphere and we would have a zone a few degrees north and south of the equator that would have an average yearly temperature of about 1 degree C, and might not, more or less, be permanently frozen.

The point is, given our current point in time in the current interglacial period, we should have about a maximum of about 280 PPM (parts per million) CO2 in the atmosphere, we have got 390 PPM. Science has nearly 750,000 years of ice core data that says CO2 normally varies between 180 to 300 PPM.

But yeah it's all a scientific hoax, just ask BS Billy he will tell you, one that has been going on for over a hundred or more years.

Ps.

Oops, CO2 does not make up a "large" percentage of the atmosphere as you seem to be saying in your little rant above, at this point, as I pointed out above there is about 390 PPM CO2 in the atmosphere, put another way that is roughly 0.3% of all the various species of atmospheric gases, hardly a large percentage in anyone's book. Gee wiz Greg I though you were smarter than that, guess not.

N20 is a potent if minor player, as far as GHGs in the atmosphere, but has much larger effects with regard to bodies of water, i.e. hypoxic/anoxic dead lakes and dead zones in near offshore areas, all along the coast in the Gulf of Mexico and Eastern Seaboard areas. Apparently you didn't pick up on that little bit, but it's something new for you to rant about I suppose.

Aquatic Dead Zones

Hay guys, how does it feel to be dumber than a nine year old? If he can figure it out, how come you guys can't?

What's that show on TV "Are you smarter than a fifth grader", seems as if many around here could not even make that claim.

Global Warming in a bottle.

Hay guys, is the rocket scientist little man larry heathen calling horses in to feed them or is little man larry "rocket scientist" heathen so uneducated he doesn't know the difference between what horses eat and "HEY GUYS"????????????????????????
It's no wonder little man larry heathen is easy pickin's for the scam artists of the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Bill Koski,

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Koski:
Hay guys, is the rocket scientist little man larry heathen calling horses in to feed them or is little man larry "rocket scientist" heathen so uneducated he doesn't know the difference between what horses eat and "HEY GUYS"????????????????????????
It's no wonder little man larry heathen is easy pickin's for the scam artists of the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You have just got to do way the he11 better than this BS Billy, I have ceased to be embarrassed by my poor spelling and grammatical skills a very long time ago, besides, aren't you being just a wee bit petty and childish? Why of course you are, so maybe we have already found the answer to the whole smarter than a fifth grader question?

Meanwhile back on the ranch why don't you ever answer any questions BS Billy, you always seem to be running off on tangents when answer are asked of you. So, are you smarter than a fifth grader, in some ways I don't think so. Well maybe more like someone with adult ADHD that has been off their meds for a while. Just can't seem to keep on track, can you BS Billy.

No, I am not a "rocket scientist", I have never claimed to be; but in fact I am a Clinical Laboratory Scientist, at least it says so on my license to practice that profession. So I think I have a pretty decent background in science. I am sorry if you feel threatened by the big words and concepts that requite some actual though to follow and understand. I have said before in these environs, I am pretty much fair to Midland average in intelligence. This of course begs the question, where does that leave you? I think it leaves you somewhere between dumber than a fifth grader and stupid as a stump at least by all accounts of what and how you post here. I guess we all have to play the cards we are dealt, some just do a better job than others at playing those cards.

Hay, oopps I mean hey, thanks for correcting my spelling, you are good for something around here after all, I mean besides being a laughing stock. You just let me know any time you find a mistake in my spelling; I need all the help I can get on that score, even yours. I'll try and remember to slip a few more in every once in a while so you can feel good about yourself, and pat yourself on the back every now and again. Seems only fair, I keep remembering that sour puss you had on in that picture holding that Wally, jeez, if that can't get you to lighten up I don't know what will, but I will do my part.

So, now that we are done with the mutual invectives, do you care to try and provide some semblance of a reasoned and rational refutation of the info I have provided in the two abstracts, I will be glad to provide you with the full text of the articles if you wish to try? I would actually be pleased if you would try and prove that the things I post here are demonstrably wrong, in ways other than spouting your usual bellicose BS.

So are you going to stick with the spell checker position, or do you care to do some actual reasoning?

MELTDOWN OF THE CLIMATE "CONSENSUS"!
The prestigious InterAcademy Council, an independent association of "the best scientists and engineers worldwide" formed in 2000 to give "high-quality advice to international bodies" has finished a thorough review of ipcc practices and found them badly wanting!
What does the best evidence tell us? That man-made global warming is a mere hypothesis that has been inflated by exagerations and downright malfeasance fueled by the awarding of fat salaries to any "scientist" that will produce the right "results".
The warming "scientific" community, the climategate E-mails reveal, is a tight clique of like-minded "scientists" and bureaucrats who give each other jobs, publish each others papers and conspire to shut out any point of view that threatens their "GRAVY TRAIN"!
In the end greivous harm will have been done, not just to individual scientists reputations, but to the once-sterling reputation of science itself. For that we will all suffer!

This is verbatim with some caps added and punctuation altered.

THE BULL SHYT little man larry POSTS IS ALL PRODUCED BY THE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR PSEUDO SCIENTISTS CHOPPED UP IN THE ARTICLE ABOVE THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Misspelled words are a sign of lack of intelligence to the geriatric Sin City ignoramus. Yet he decides to C&P a statement with no less than four grammatical errors and misspelled words.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Koski:
MELTDOWN OF THE CLIMATE "CONSENSUS"!
The prestigious InterAcademy Council, an independent association of "the best scientists and engineers worldwide" formed in 2000 to give "high-quality advice to international bodies" has finished a thorough review of ipcc practices and found them badly wanting!
What does the best evidence tell us? That man-made global warming is a mere hypothesis that has been inflated by exagerations and downright malfeasance fueled by the awarding of fat salaries to any "scientist" that will produce the right "results".
The warming "scientific" community, the climategate E-mails reveal, is a tight clique of like-minded "scientists" and bureaucrats who give each other jobs, publish each others papers and conspire to shut out any point of view that threatens their "GRAVY TRAIN"!
In the end greivous harm will have been done, not just to individual scientists reputations, but to the once-sterling reputation of science itself. For that we will all suffer!

This is verbatim with some caps added and punctuation altered.

THE BULL SHYT little man larry POSTS IS ALL PRODUCED BY THE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR PSEUDO SCIENTISTS CHOPPED UP IN THE ARTICLE ABOVE THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

quote:
Originally posted by Bill Koski:

quote:
Originally posted by Bill Koski:

quote:
Originally posted by Bill Koski:
Why are alleged atheists so hung up on religion?
The word bible is used all the time without any religious connection!
MELTDOWN OF THE CLIMATE "CONSENSUS"!
The prestigious InterAcademy Council, an independent association of "the best scientists and engineers worldwide" formed in 2000 to give "high-quality advice to international bodies" has finished a thorough review of ipcc practices and found them badly wanting!
What does the best evidence tell us? That man-made global warming is a mere hypothesis that has been inflated by exagerations and downright malfeasance fueled by the awarding of fat salaries to any "scientist" that will produce the right "results".
The warming "scientific" community, the climategate E-mails reveal, is a tight clique of like-minded "scientists" and bureaucrats who give each other jobs, publish each others papers and conspire to shut out any point of view that threatens their "GRAVY TRAIN"!
In the end greivous harm will have been done, not just to individual scientists reputations, but to the once-sterling reputation of science itself. For that we will all suffer!

This is verbatim with some caps added and punctuation altered.

Once again, just for BS Billy, as he apparently missed my reply to his bu11sh1t back on page 90. https://drr.infopop.cc/eve/foru...52/m/1791042992/p/90

Apparently BS Billy is at it again.

Originally posted by Bill Koski:
"MELTDOWN OF THE CLIMATE "CONSENSUS"!

Paragraph: 1 BS Billy

"The prestigious InterAcademy Council, an independent association of "the best scientists and engineers worldwide" formed in 2000 to give "high-quality advice to international bodies" has finished a thorough review of ipcc practices and found them badly wanting!"

Paragraph: 2 BS Billy

"What does the best evidence tell us? That man-made global warming is a mere hypothesis that has been inflated by exagerations and downright malfeasance fueled by the awarding of fat salaries to any "scientist" that will produce the right "results"."

Paragraph: 3 BS Billy

"The warming "scientific" community, the climategate E-mails reveal, is a tight clique of like-minded "scientists" and bureaucrats who give each other jobs, publish each others papers and conspire to shut out any point of view that threatens their "GRAVY TRAIN"!"

Paragraph: 4 BS Billy

"In the end greivous harm will have been done, not just to individual scientists reputations, but to the once-sterling reputation of science itself. For that we will all suffer!"

Straight from the keyboard of BS Billy himself we have,
"This is verbatim with some caps added and punctuation altered."

What we have here is BS Billy showing that he is either incapable of telling the truth or is simply stupid as a stump. The BS that Billy has been repeatedly regurgitating is an article by Matt Patterson at/on the New York Post. He says its "verbatim", I say absolute BU11Sh1t!

Here is the link to the full article by Patterson,
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/o...kWdclUvwhVr6DYH6A4uJ

Here we go lets compare shall we.

Paragraph: 1 Matt Patterson

"But the prestigious InterAcademy Council, an independent association of "the best scientists and engineers worldwide" (as the group's own Web site puts it) formed in 2000 to give "high-quality advice to international bodies," has finished a thorough review of IPCC practices -- and found them badly wanting."

Apparently verbatim with caps added and punctuation altered, means taking two parentheses out, along with everything in between them as well, verbatim yeah right. You are a lying sack of sh1t Billy.

Paragraph: 2 Matt Patterson

Yeah that is the point, it is all Matt Patterson speaking, and not the prestigious InterAcademy Council as apparently BS Billy and or Matt Patterson would have us believe. And its the same for all the rest of it, its all Matt Patterson. So what is it BS Billy are you too stupid to be able to tell that the stuff you posted was written by Matt Patterson at the "prestigious New York Post" and not the IAC, or were you lying by omission in not saying that the stuff you posted was from an article by Matt Patterson? So what is your pick BS Billy, you stupid or a liar? Frankly, I think both, but that is open for discussion.

Some might find it highly enlightening to know that the IPCC, heinous organization that it is portrayed as by Matt Patterson and BS Billy, was itself the party who commissioned the (prestigious, meaning you can't start casting aspersion on them now as well) IAC to review their policy and procedures, well fancy that. Hardly something a heinous organization of rouge scientist out to dupe the whole world would do, now is it?

This little bit quoted below is written by the IAC in what I would term its top page executive summary of their full report to IPCC on its policy and procedures, along with their highlighted recommendations. You will note that IAC is hardly rebuking the IPCC in scathing terms here, when it says, "the IPCC has gained enormous respect and even shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for informing climate policy and raising public awareness worldwide."

"Through its assessment reports, the IPCC has gained enormous respect and even shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for informing climate policy and raising public awareness worldwide. However, amidst an increasingly intense public debate over the science, impacts, and cost of climate change, the IPCC has come under heightened scrutiny about its impartiality with respect to climate policy and about the accuracy and balance of its reports. In response, the United Nations and the IPCC commissioned the InterAcademy Council to convene a Committee to review the processes and procedures of the IPCC."

http://www.interacademycouncil...S/Reports/13042.aspx

Or you can go HERE for the full IAC report; you can either open the IAC's online report reader or download the PDF's individually for perusal at your leisure.

Billy when are you going to stop making a fool of yourself?

Finely as an addendum to the above previous response, to BS Billy's repeated and continued ignorant regurgitations, none of which says anything in specific about the two abstracts I have recently posted, neither of which has anything to do with the IPCC and its past publications. You have in no way responded to the specifics of either of the abstracts or even asked to see the whole articles, which I have offered to provide to you. Further they are current publications, in Science not from the IPCC, not even a month old. So somehow you think that political commentary by a hack writer from a third rate web site about a subject that occurred months or years ago about procedural policies at IPCC, has some ability to discredit the specifics of these articles, you really are beyond belief Billy.

Billy your mind is closed so tightly, if it were possible to set off a thermonuclear device inside your skull I am pretty sure your eyes wouldn't even bulge a millimeter.

Your position as proof reader for this forum is most assuredly secure I see.

quote:

Originally posted by Trans Lady:
Jeremy, my question has to do with NOAA, you know the same guys that give us global warming predictions.

Back in May they predicted 14 to 23 tropical storms, with 8 to 14 developing into hurricanes, and 3 to seven becoming major hurricanes.

NOAA Expects Busy Atlantic Hurricane Season

"this season could be one of the more active on record,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator.

So, how is their predictions holding up?

21 named storms and 10 hurricanes. #11 on the way, possibly a twelfth.

quote:

Originally posted by Jeremy J.:

quote:

Originally posted by Trans Lady:
Jeremy, my question has to do with NOAA, you know the same guys that give us global warming predictions.

Back in May they predicted 14 to 23 tropical storms, with 8 to 14 developing into hurricanes, and 3 to seven becoming major hurricanes.

NOAA Expects Busy Atlantic Hurricane Season

"this season could be one of the more active on record,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator.

So, how is their predictions holding up?

21 named storms and 10 hurricanes. #11 on the way, possibly a twelfth.

Even a blind squirrel finds an occasional nut! lol

What happened to BS billy?

Old man made a fool of himself.

Where the Hell is algore?
It's ccccccooooolld!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Looked for my snowmobile suit, no luck!

old man.... why do you post in this topic?

Many questions have been asked of you for your insane comments.

run bsbilly....RUN.......................

With the Republican take over of the House of Representatives the carbon trading scam has been dropped from the Chicago exchange. The price dropped from $7.00 a ton to $0.10 a ton!
The BIG losers were algore investments and goldman sachs!
One more myth dies with the light of day cast upon it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The man-made global warming hoaxers are covering all the bases now!
THEIR PROGNOSTICATION NOW IS THAT MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING WILL CAUSE MUCH COLDER WINTERS IN NORTHERN AREAS OF THE PLANET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Will these hoaxers ever admit that they are perpetrating a humongus scam on the worlds population????????????????????