Climate Change - the big debate

[s2art]

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

However the layer above the greenhouse gases will, of course, get cooler.

?? Do you mean water vapour? Even that gets very high albeit most condenses out.

Don't know about specific components in the layer.

You would expect the region above the layer at which the greenhouse gases accumulate to show a slight, but measurable reduction in temperature though, proportional to the CO2 increase. I believe this is known as the mesophere?

Edited by Prof Prolapse on Friday 19th November 14:01

This is nonsense. There is no layer above the greenhouse gases. There is plenty of CO2 in the stratosphere, if less H2O. One of the reasons statospheric cooling is expected is simply that CO2 is a better radiator of lwir.

[Prof Prolapse]

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

However the layer above the greenhouse gases will, of course, get cooler.

?? Do you mean water vapour? Even that gets very high albeit most condenses out.

Don't know about specific components in the layer.

You would expect the region above the layer at which the greenhouse gases accumulate to show a slight, but measurable reduction in temperature though, proportional to the CO2 increase. I believe this is known as the mesophere?

Edited by Prof Prolapse on Friday 19th November 14:01

This is nonsense. There is no layer above the greenhouse gases. There is plenty of CO2 in the stratosphere, if less H2O. One of the reasons statospheric cooling is expected is simply that CO2 is a better radiator of lwir.

Observable peer reviewed non-sense?

[s2art]

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

However the layer above the greenhouse gases will, of course, get cooler.

?? Do you mean water vapour? Even that gets very high albeit most condenses out.

Don't know about specific components in the layer.

You would expect the region above the layer at which the greenhouse gases accumulate to show a slight, but measurable reduction in temperature though, proportional to the CO2 increase. I believe this is known as the mesophere?

Edited by Prof Prolapse on Friday 19th November 14:01

This is nonsense. There is no layer above the greenhouse gases. There is plenty of CO2 in the stratosphere, if less H2O. One of the reasons statospheric cooling is expected is simply that CO2 is a better radiator of lwir.

Observable peer reviewed non-sense?

Nope, just your statements.

[Prof Prolapse]

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

However the layer above the greenhouse gases will, of course, get cooler.

?? Do you mean water vapour? Even that gets very high albeit most condenses out.

Don't know about specific components in the layer.

You would expect the region above the layer at which the greenhouse gases accumulate to show a slight, but measurable reduction in temperature though, proportional to the CO2 increase. I believe this is known as the mesophere?

Edited by Prof Prolapse on Friday 19th November 14:01

This is nonsense. There is no layer above the greenhouse gases. There is plenty of CO2 in the stratosphere, if less H2O. One of the reasons statospheric cooling is expected is simply that CO2 is a better radiator of lwir.

Observable peer reviewed non-sense?

Nope, just your statements.

Lol, the first wasn't a bloody statement until you selectively removed my references you tosser.

[s2art]

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

However the layer above the greenhouse gases will, of course, get cooler.

?? Do you mean water vapour? Even that gets very high albeit most condenses out.

Don't know about specific components in the layer.

You would expect the region above the layer at which the greenhouse gases accumulate to show a slight, but measurable reduction in temperature though, proportional to the CO2 increase. I believe this is known as the mesophere?

Edited by Prof Prolapse on Friday 19th November 14:01

This is nonsense. There is no layer above the greenhouse gases. There is plenty of CO2 in the stratosphere, if less H2O. One of the reasons statospheric cooling is expected is simply that CO2 is a better radiator of lwir.

Observable peer reviewed non-sense?

Nope, just your statements.

Lol, the first wasn't a bloody statement until you selectively removed my references you tosser.

I was referring to your previous posts too. You seemingly believe in 'layers above greenhouse gases'. That is nonsense.

[Prof Prolapse]

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

However the layer above the greenhouse gases will, of course, get cooler.

?? Do you mean water vapour? Even that gets very high albeit most condenses out.

Don't know about specific components in the layer.

You would expect the region above the layer at which the greenhouse gases accumulate to show a slight, but measurable reduction in temperature though, proportional to the CO2 increase. I believe this is known as the mesophere?

Edited by Prof Prolapse on Friday 19th November 14:01

This is nonsense. There is no layer above the greenhouse gases. There is plenty of CO2 in the stratosphere, if less H2O. One of the reasons statospheric cooling is expected is simply that CO2 is a better radiator of lwir.

Observable peer reviewed non-sense?

Nope, just your statements.

Lol, the first wasn't a bloody statement until you selectively removed my references you tosser.

I was referring to your previous posts too. You seemingly believe in 'layers above greenhouse gases'. That is nonsense.

You don't believe the atmosphere becomes less dense the higher up you go then?

[BliarOut]

'Twas a cloud free night the other night, god it was cold. Last night it was cloudy and it was fairly warm for the time of year. CO2 levels remained consistent throughout.

That is all Professor Rectum Prolapse.

Whoops

Edited by BliarOut on Friday 19th November 16:17

[s2art]

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

s2art said:

Prof Prolapse said:

However the layer above the greenhouse gases will, of course, get cooler.

?? Do you mean water vapour? Even that gets very high albeit most condenses out.

Don't know about specific components in the layer.

You would expect the region above the layer at which the greenhouse gases accumulate to show a slight, but measurable reduction in temperature though, proportional to the CO2 increase. I believe this is known as the mesophere?

Edited by Prof Prolapse on Friday 19th November 14:01

This is nonsense. There is no layer above the greenhouse gases. There is plenty of CO2 in the stratosphere, if less H2O. One of the reasons statospheric cooling is expected is simply that CO2 is a better radiator of lwir.

Observable peer reviewed non-sense?

Nope, just your statements.

Lol, the first wasn't a bloody statement until you selectively removed my references you tosser.

I was referring to your previous posts too. You seemingly believe in 'layers above greenhouse gases'. That is nonsense.

You don't believe the atmosphere becomes less dense the higher up you go then?

And what has that got to do with the absence of greenhouse gases in said less dense heights? You seem to be claiming 'layers above greenhouse gases'.

[turbobloke]

Teddy-out-of-the-pram moment.

The United States will be banned from selling goods to many countries if it continues to shirk its promise to cut greenhouse gas emissions, according to the world’s leading climate change economist. Asked what type of US products could face restrictions, Lord Stern said: “Aircraft, clearly, some cars, machine tools” Lord Stern said that a complete ban on some goods was also possible. He said the American people should overcome their historical antipathy to taxation and accept that emissions needed to be controlled either through a tax or a trading scheme.
Ben Webster, The Times 19 November 2010

Climate Change Economist no less. Wow.

[turbobloke]

Meanwhile back in the real world...

More than five million British households will struggle to stay warm this winter and the number of people likely to die in freezing temperatures is set to rise sharply, a leading charity warned yesterday.

Sarah O'Grady, Daily Express, 19 November 2010

[Pesty]

It is people like him who will do the most damage to the warmists I think.

Worse is better

They should print that quote about tax and banning goods on the front page of every American newspaper. It would kill MMGW dead over night

[hidetheelephants]

Pesty said:

It is people like him who will do the most damage to the warmists I think.

Worse is better

They should print that quote about tax and banning goods on the front page of every American newspaper. It would kill MMGW dead over night

Not half; if they try that on, there will be blood on the floor at the next WTO meeting.

[Blib]

turbobloke said:

Teddy-out-of-the-pram moment.

The United States will be banned from selling goods to many countries if it continues to shirk its promise to cut greenhouse gas emissions, according to the world’s leading climate change economist. Asked what type of US products could face restrictions, Lord Stern said: “Aircraft, clearly, some cars, machine tools” Lord Stern said that a complete ban on some goods was also possible. He said the American people should overcome their historical antipathy to taxation and accept that emissions needed to be controlled either through a tax or a trading scheme.
Ben Webster, The Times 19 November 2010

Climate Change Economist no less. Wow.

He's jumped the shark.

[turbobloke]

Guam said:

turbobloke said:

Teddy-out-of-the-pram moment.

The United States will be banned from selling goods to many countries if it continues to shirk its promise to cut greenhouse gas emissions, according to the world’s leading climate change economist. Asked what type of US products could face restrictions, Lord Stern said: “Aircraft, clearly, some cars, machine tools” Lord Stern said that a complete ban on some goods was also possible. He said the American people should overcome their historical antipathy to taxation and accept that emissions needed to be controlled either through a tax or a trading scheme.
Ben Webster, The Times 19 November 2010

Climate Change Economist no less. Wow.

I guess thats what they meant by giving them a Stern talking to

Oh dear

As to Stern, words fail, there's nothing in the dictionary for people who invent impossible science such as 'irreversible melting of ice' but then he's in good company in manmadeup warming's junksiencefest and he's an economist after all so it's too much to expect him to know what he's talking about.

[turbobloke]

Pesty said:

It is people like him who will do the most damage to the warmists I think.

Worse is better

They should print that quote about tax and banning goods on the front page of every American newspaper. It would kill MMGW dead over night

And Rompuy and Edenhofer.

[munroman]

turbobloke said:

Meanwhile back in the real world...

More than five million British households will struggle to stay warm this winter and the number of people likely to die in freezing temperatures is set to rise sharply, a leading charity warned yesterday.

Sarah O'Grady, Daily Express, 19 November 2010

Let's remember that while the likes of Gore, Stern and Pachuli are lining their pockets, the above is a real issue, the scum that perpetuate the myth of AGW are causing real misery and suffering to millions.

At least they will be warm in Hell.

[deeps]

turbobloke said:

As to Stern, words fail, there's nothing in the dictionary for people who invent impossible science such as 'irreversible melting of ice'...

there's a few appropriate words in my dictionary

[Jasandjules]

turbobloke said:

Teddy-out-of-the-pram moment.

The United States will be banned from selling goods to many countries if it continues to shirk its promise to cut greenhouse gas emissions, according to the world’s leading climate change economist. Asked what type of US products could face restrictions, Lord Stern said: “Aircraft, clearly, some cars, machine tools” Lord Stern said that a complete ban on some goods was also possible. He said the American people should overcome their historical antipathy to taxation and accept that emissions needed to be controlled either through a tax or a trading scheme.
Ben Webster, The Times 19 November 2010

Climate Change Economist no less. Wow.

Am I the only one hoping that some special ops team lifts him and flies him to Gitmo for threatening the security of the USA.......

[odyssey2200]

Enough about Stern
What is Monkton up to these days?

Gone too quite IMHO

[Blib]

Metcheck being down (again), I resorted to the Met Office's website to check on the coming weekend's weather.

Once there, I clicked onto their 'Climate Change' page and then onto "Latest News". Interestingly, the latest news is dated May of this year. Nothing at all after that.

It hasn't been updated since roughly the time of the election.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/news/lat...