I don't have a refference, i grabbed that from someones post on a message board, to, as i said, give thought to those who know more about the subject than i to see if that made sense.
2009/6/5 Mark Iverson <[email protected]>: > Just so you all have an idea of what its all about, first, a summary of the > theory and then I'll > comment on Nick's post: > > "The standard theory of anthropogenic global warming is challenged by a new > theory which is based on > empirical evidence and a reevaluation of the Eddinger equations, using a > different set of boundary > conditions. In this exposition the Eddington radiation equilibrium equations > (which apply to stars) > are solved correctly for a planet with a semi-transparent atmosphere, like > the Earth. The correct > solutions predict that Earth's atmosphere holds an amount of greenhouse gases > that maximize > radiation of heat into space. It appears that the Earth has a self-regulation > mechanism that allows > increases of CO2 to exert only a very minor influence on the planet's > temperature. Independent > measurements give insight into the mechanism of how this self-regulation > takes place. Still other > measurements contradict the atmospheric heating that supposedly follows > directly from standard > climate models as a result of increased CO2 during the last few decades. > Cooling is observed, > instead. Due to the importance of the problem for policies that affect the > well-being of the world's > population, we conclude that there are now ample grounds to organize a > discussion between the > scientific proponents of these two theories." > REF: http://www.landshape.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=introduction > > > Nick: > > Your disparaging comment is unconvincing, and misleading; ALL THE FACTS, not > just what supports what > you believe to be true. I went to your reference (and BTW, I'm still waiting > for leaking pen's > reference!) and did some reading there and at other sites, and it didn't take > long to find one > person's comment about you: > > "Nick you are still obfuscating, but thanks for the response anyway. > "As I said, momentum is a vector, and because it is symmetric about the > Earth's axis, for S_T it > sums to zero anyway." > > Ok so how do they do this? You said, > "The escaping photons provide an effective force on the earth. These might > budge the orbit by a > nanometre or so" > > "You are making it up as you go by the look of it. Now consider a column > through which the photons > of S_T are passing through the atmosphere they have a momentum what happens > to that momentum due to > interaction with the particles in the amosphere on the way out? Try to stay > focused on the > question." > > ME: For those that are truly interested in this topic, there is some very > good DISCUSSION about Dr. > Miskolczi's papers on these sites: > > http://www.climateaudit.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=556 > > http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/The_Saturated_Greenhouse_Effect.htm > > Here's a bibliography and review of recent peer-reviewed papers which > questions Global Warming > Science: > http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/files/documents/Madhav%20bibliography%20LONG%20VERSION%20Feb% > 206-07.pdf > > > ME: And some of this is beginning to sound very (F&P) familiar... > > "... Then Miskolczi himself posts a few messages in his defense and he is > insulted by Gavin and > 'raypierre.' > > Gavin and 'raypierre' claim that Mikolczi makes several blatant algebraic > errors in the first 9 > pages of his report that invalidate his entire thesis. They don't say what > those errors are; they > are apparently saving them for a paper written by a sophomore physics class > as a class project. In > other words, Miklosci's math errors are so obvious that sophomore physics > majors can point them out. > > Maybe they are right, but that was in March and, as far as I can tell, the > "class paper" has not > been posted yet." > > -Mark > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nick Palmer [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 6:43 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Science of Greenhouse Effect...Time for some balance? > > Ferenc Miskolczi - balance? - oh please! Before you now it he will be > "proving" his theories using > the size, relationships and angles of the great pyramids. > > http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=Ferenc_Miskolczi > > > Nick Palmer > > On the side of the Planet - and the people - because they're worth it > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.53/2154 - Release Date: 06/04/09 > 05:53:00 > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.53/2154 - Release Date: 06/04/09 > 05:53:00 > >
