wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,947
- Reactions
- 13,236
Notice anything in that headline Horace?
>>>>>Revamped<<<<< satellite data shows no pause in global warming
http://phys.org/news/2016-03-revamped-satellite-global.html
CC is happening really? PROVE IT for ONCE and mebbe jus meebe I might listen. And FFS dont; go the world is hot and lizards are dying crapola.
Notice anything in that headline Horace?
The scientific process always includes refining and updating data sets. Of course the tin hat brigade see this as suspicious, but that is due to their lack of understanding of the process.
On the contrary. That process is well understood by those cognisant of the process whereby the zealots adjust the evidence to produce predetermined outcomes consistent with religious beliefs.
Unlike religion, science dissidents are not executed. If they can prove their claims with evidence then those claims are accepted.
Perhaps you could illuminate me on this matter of evidencing and/or proving scientific claims. How exactly does evidence adjustment validate unproven scientific conjectures?
So which experts should I be consulting, I wonder? Should I consult those experts in the field with whom Sir R agrees, or those in disagreeance with Sir R? And what difference would it make anyway?Perhaps you should ask the experts about their data sets and let us know their response.
So which experts should I be consulting, I wonder? Should I consult those experts in the field with whom Sir R agrees, or those in disagreeance with Sir R? And what difference would it make anyway?
Contact anyone you like, it doesn't bother me.
One may rightly ask how could I possibly know this?
I think it's established facts that too much of anything is not good for you, including H2O.
Of course it doesn't. You already know which experts to believe in and which to doubt. Any disagreeable response one returns with may anticipate a similar reaction to current.
One may rightly ask how could I possibly know this?
The consistency of outcomes of repeated experiments on this thread shall be my reply!
IMO the thing we have to consider is how the outdoor pollution levels of VOC gases, including CO2, reduce the gap to indoor concentrations and how much respite our bodies are going to get when when our brains say "get outside now before you die!". It's feasible our health will suffer much more from poisoning and disease than asphyxiation. So for our own sakes we should make sure we throw any empty plastic bottles into the outside bin dilgently rather than storing inside, keep our houses well ventilated and explain to the wife that painting the walls, vacuuming the carpets and mowing the lawn is bad karma.
I've always wondered about the inside of vehicles too. A lot of plastic getting hot in the sun and releasing who knows what.
Too much of a good thing? Apparently plant root systems don't like too much C02 either.
I wonder if the build up rate of C02 from 0.035% in 2005 to 0.04% today is straight line or exponential.
My current profession means I have to know a bit about air quality and how to mitigate deleterious effects on the victims of the modern factory system where humans are caged animals in man made structures, duped into thinking they matter.
In Oz, hi rise office buildings, especially green star and nabers accredited, generally have their indoor air quality controlled by automation systems, at max 700ppm C02, although that's based on ASHRAE recommending 700ppm above outdoor levels (when outdoor levels were around the 300 ish ppm level). Exposure in the production workplace is generally maxed out to 5000 ppm over an 8 hour period, before the EPA takes over from the union rep's job.
The real problem concerning ventilation of populated areas is VOC concentrations, of which C02 is in the soup. It's the volatile organic compounds in confined spaces like office towers and homes that is the vociferous villain that injures/kills more by stealth than overt means.
We've all been taught at high school about aromatic hydrocarbons, but would rather think about other things. The methylene chlorides, formaldehydes, etc are all around 500% greater inside homes than outside and we wonder why we can't kick the cancer habit. We get home and feel the immediate need to relax and blame it on a hard days work, when in fact we are giving ourselves a large dose of fatigue inducing, headache causing, rash promoting, itchy eye chemicals into our lungs.
IMO the thing we have to consider is how the outdoor pollution levels of VOC gases, including CO2, reduce the gap to indoor concentrations and how much respite our bodies are going to get when when our brains say "get outside now before you die!". It's feasible our health will suffer much more from poisoning and disease than asphyxiation. So for our own sakes we should make sure we throw any empty plastic bottles into the outside bin dilgently rather than storing inside, keep our houses well ventilated and explain to the wife that painting the walls, vacuuming the carpets and mowing the lawn is bad karma.
Lots of theories on the extinction of the dinosaurs including climate change.
http://www.unmuseum.org/deaddino.htm
You might enquire about their qualifications in the area of interest.
Your reference is not in any way succinct as "The Sixth Extinction"
This book does not deal in theories. From anthropological diggings core sampling and scientific tests. A straightforward and factual text.
I might enquire about their funding also.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?