CO2 Has Changed The Fundamental Principles Of Physics

Mann tells us that CO2 broke previously reliable tree ring data.

NSIDC tells us that CO2 broke a previously reliable correlation between NAO and Arctic ice.

Jeff Masters tells us that CO2 broke a previously reliable relationship between cold and snow.

Now we hear that CO2 broke a previously reliable relationship between temperatures and glaciers in New Zealand.

Make a theory, assume it is correct, throw out any data which doesn’t fit, and blame CO2 for your actions! That is what we call the scientific method.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

48 Responses to CO2 Has Changed The Fundamental Principles Of Physics

  1. Latitude says:

    well, since glaciers are growing in New Zealand……..

    No one ever asks the question, ” how do we get 100,000 year old ice cores from Greenland”

  2. omnologos says:

    Furthermore, few seem able to understand the meaning of archeological finds uncovered thanks to retreating glaciers

    And no, I am not going to explain it 😎

  3. glacierman says:

    Steven said:

    “Make a theory, assume it is correct, throw out any data which doesn’t fit, and blame CO2 for your actions! That is what we call the scientific method.”

    The post-normal scientific method to be precise.

  4. S.E.Hendriksen says:

    @Latitude

    The latest Ice core from NEEM in Northern Greenland is more than 123.000 years old at the bottom, it’s from the Eem period.
    http://neem.nbi.ku.dk/

    • Latitude says:

      close enough

      So we know it’s been warmer in the past….

      …how come we can get ice cores that old then?

      • suyts says:

        New dynamic discovered! Ice that never melted! Something about warmcold in the past. Laws of physics were different then, obviously.

    • suyts says:

      Yes, S. E., I put as much faith in the accuracy of ice cores as I do treeometers.

      • Scott says:

        Agreed here. As useful as the ice core data might be for showing the warmists wrong, I don’t trust it at all. Guess I’m too much of a believer in only the hard sciences, none of this historical stuff. 🙂

        -Scott

      • suyts says:

        Well, if they put things in proper perspective, then geological and archeological evidence is just fine. But telling me a tree ring shows a temperature to a 1/10th of a degree………. :-|……. ain’t buying it. Same with ice cores except they’re less tangible. This piece of trapped air is exactly 72,256 years old…….. again…. :-|…… nope.

      • glacierman says:

        I am sure there is no chemical interaction of the trapped air bubble with the ice and no air or water can move through that ice. And we all know that the ice does not change physically or chemically once it on the surface of the Earth. You know, rocks are solid and we all know air and water cannot move through rocks./s

  5. MikeTheDenier says:

    Colorado. Where ALL votes count. Be they legal or not!!!!!

    5,000 non-citizens voting in Colorado a ‘wake-up call’ for states

    http://thehill.com/homenews/house/153079-gop-says-5000-non-citizens-voting-in-colorado-a-wake-up-call-for-states

  6. Craig Dillon says:

    hmm, more idiots talking to idiots. I will type r e a l slow, so some of you climate denying idiots will UNDERSTAND.
    100,000 years ago is not very old, by climate standards. For the last 30 million years the Antarctic was frozen over. For the past several million years, CO2 NEVER got above 300ppm. We are now at 391ppm and rising about 2.5ppm per year.

    Now, there are great lag times between causes and the ultimate effects. The Holocene climate system has now been destabilized by the high CO2. The Arctic ice cap IS melting…we can see it with the satellite images. If you don’t recognize that, then you are blind or an absolute idiot. GO LOOK, for chrissake.

    Now the loss of Arctic sea ice does NOT raise the oceans. It does convert an area that reflected the sun’s energy into one that absorbs it. So, now the earth absorbs more solar energy each year. Don’t you think that might make things warmer? The climatologists can tell you how much more watts are absorbed by each square meter every year. Now it will be centuries before Greenland melts, and maybe millinnia before the Antarctic melts, but with the continuous rise in CO2, the process of GW is unstoppable.

    Now for the liberal haters….you are right to a degree. The Kyoto protocol was absurd. Carbon trading is a joke. Even if we changed completely over to solar energy, and didn’t use a drop of carbon based fuel, there is a likelihood that the process is now irreversible. Mother Nature is now putting CO2 and CH4 into the atmosphere from melting permafrost and undersea clathrates. If that does not stop, then it will dwarf what we have done anyway.

    No, I am not an alarmist. An alarm is something that we can respond to and do something about. I suspect that the process has gone too far for that. So, get yourself a frozen margarita and enjoy the show.

    • OMG – Greenland is gone

    • suyts says:

      lol, uhmm, Craig, you’ve totally blown yourself up. You entirely oversimplified the albedo effect and you’ve overstated its significance. If, the albedo was as important as you seem to state, why didn’t we spiral out of control 4 years ago when the arctic ice was at the lowest? Turns out, it was a crock. The most recent thought I’ve heard expressed, is that a bare arctic would allow energy release otherwise not available. In other words, a cooling effect.

      We’re not “destabilized” in any manner. In fact, we find a decrease in the ACE values recently. The decadal global temp trend is flat-lined(actually slightly decreasing) in spite of continued increase of CO2. How do you reconcile that?

      And, just so we’re clear about what you’re stating about time and CO2, and so the readers can understand, go here. http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/2005-08-18/dioxide_files/image002.gif

      Yeh, pretty convincing stuff.

    • suyts says:

      As far as looking at the ice for ourselves, Craig, we do. Do you?

      More ice this time of year than 2005, 2006, and 2007. Oh my, yes we’re doomed I tell you!!! Doomed!

    • glacierman says:

      Craig Dillon said:

      “hmm, more idiots talking to idiots.”

      Keep talking, the resident trolls are sure to show up.

    • MikeTheDenier says:

      OMG The Gaggle Goons are already out in force.

    • Mike Davis says:

      Craig:
      I agree you are not an alarmist. You display the symptoms of a Chicken Little WANNABEE!
      Run And Hide there is a Meteor coming and it has your name on it! I know because I wrote it there! When I was last visiting the Flying Spaghetti Monster!

    • Sparks says:

      Craig Dillon says:
      March 31, 2011 at 8:03 pm

      “…Mother Nature is now putting CO2 and CH4 into the atmosphere from melting permafrost and undersea clathrates. If that does not stop, then it will dwarf what we have done anyway”

      So basically your argument is;

      Once Upon a time… there was this magic fairy called “Mother Nature” who lived in harmony and in perfect balance on planet Earth with all it’s cute and cuddly creatures, where nothing ever changed, sky’s were blue and doted with white fluffy clouds, there was no storms back then or any other natural disaster and C02 was at a level that was pleasing to the “Mother Nature” fairy.

      Until one day along came the destructive hunter gathers who over many eons learned to develop agriculture, build communities and develop technologies that would further help them learn to grow into a sophisticated civilization and accomplish amazing achievements, But the “Mother Nature” fairy who apparently gets her climate information from her environmentalist believers who have flooded her with prayers of hockey stick charts, alarmist predictions and story’s of melting ice and dead polar bears, she becomes so brainwashed about how Humans are destroying the planet with the effects of a tiny level of C02 compared to that of the rest of the Natural Co2 on the planet she becomes very upset and breaks down while at the same time becoming filled with hate and rage for all those Bad humans…

      After years of being bombarded by all the lies an disinformation piling up against the bad humans and seeing all the images of falling polar bears the “Mother Nature” fairy decides one day to take action against the Bad Humans, she quickly releases more Co2 into the atmosphere and melts all the Ice caps, so that it causes the earth to warm to such an extent that the climate collapses into a very turbulent and unpredictable chaotic system that don’t match some scientists model predictions anymore, which confuses the Bad Humans.

      Then The “Mother Nature” fairy conjures up some earth quakes and plenty of wintry winters with lots of deep snow & makes the planet so hot or cold that all the Bad humans die, but… The “Mother Nature” fairy realizes that she can’t kill all the Bad humans or she will not exist, so she decides to keep alive a fue small groups of environmentalist believers, whom she allows to forage around for berries and live in caves and they all live hippie ever after.

      Is this the basic story you are trying to express to everyone? It’s sounds to me like it is!

  7. cleanwater says:

    It’s time to repeat the following inf- share it.
    Climate Realists Article
    http://climaterealists.com/5783
    ALAN SIDDONS   HEADLINE STORY   JOHN O’SULLIVAN   NASA  
    NASA in Shock New Controversy: Two Global Warming Reasons Why by John O’Sullivan, guest post at Climate Realists
    Thursday, May 27th 2010, 3:06 PM EDT
    Co2sceptic (Site Admin)
    NASA covered up for forty years proof that the greenhouse gas theory was bogus. But even worse, did the U.S. space agency fudge its numbers on Earth’s energy budget to cover up the facts?

    As per my article this week, forty years ago the space agency, NASA, proved there was no such thing as a greenhouse gas effect because the ‘blackbody’ numbers supporting the theory didn’t add up in a 3-dimensional universe:

    “During lunar day, the lunar regolith absorbs the radiation from the sun and transports it inward and is stored in a layer approximately 50cm thick….in contrast with a precipitous drop in temperature if it was a simple black body, the regolith then proceeds to transport the stored heat back onto the surface, thus warming it up significantly over the black body approximation…”

    Thus, the ‘blackbody approximations’ were proven to be as useful as a chocolate space helmet; the guesswork of using the Stefan-Boltzmann equations underpinning the man-made global warming theory was long ago debunked. If NASA had made known that Stefan-Boltzmann’s numbers were an irrelevant red-herring then the taxpayers of the world would have been spared the $50 billion wasted on global warming research; because it would have removed the only credible scientific basis to support the theory that human emissions of carbon dioxide changed Earth’s climate.

    But, until May 24, 2010 these facts remained swept under the carpet. For the Apollo missions NASA had successfully devised new calculations to safely put astronauts on the Moon-based on actual measured temperatures of the lunar surface. But no one appears to have told government climatologists who, to this day, insist their junk science is ‘settled’ based on their bogus ‘blackbody’ guesswork.
    NASA’s Confusion over Earth’s Energy Budget

    But it gets worse: compounding such disarray, NASA, now apparently acting more like a politicized mouthpiece for a socialist one world government, cannot even provide consistent numbers on Earth’s actual energy budget.

    Thanks to further discussion with scientist, Alan Siddons, a co-author of the paper, ‘A Greenhouse Effect on the Moon,’ it appears I inadvertently stumbled on a NASA graph that shows the U.S. space agency is unable to tally up the numbers on the supposed greenhouse gas “backradiation.” Why would this be?

    In its graphic representation of the energy budget of the Earth the agency has conspicuously contradicted itself in its depiction of back-radiation based on its various graphs on Earth’s radiation budget.

    As Siddons sagely advised me, “This opens the question as to WHICH budget NASA actually endorses, because the one you show is consistent with physics: 70 units of sunlight go in, 70 units of infrared go out, and there’s no back-flow of some ridiculous other magnitude. Interesting.”

    Climate Sceptic Scientists’ Growing Confidence

    Thanks to Siddons and his co-authors of ‘A Greenhouse Effect on the Moon,’ the world now has scientific evidence to show the greenhouse gas theory (GHG) was junk all along.

    As the truth now spreads, an increasing number of scientists refute the greenhouse gas theory, many have been prompted by the shocking revelations since the Climategate scandal. The public have also grown more aware of how a clique of government climatologists were deliberately ‘hiding the decline’ in the reliability of their proxy temperature data all along.

    But NASA’s lunar temperature readings prove that behind that smoke was real fire. Some experts now boldly go so far as to say the entire global warming theory contravenes the established laws of physics.

    How NASA responds to these astonishing revelations may well tell us how politicized the American space agency really is.

    ##############################################################

    Short bio: John O’Sullivan is a legal analyst and writer who for several years has litigated in government corruption and conspiracy cases in both the US and Britain. Visit his Website: http://www.suite101.com/profile.cfm/johnosullivan

  8. Craig Dillon says:

    Oh, one more point — hypocrisy. The Koch brothers and the oil industry would have us believe that global warming is just crap. But, who has plans to spend millions of dollars to re-engineer the Alaskan pipeline because of melting permafrost? Also, the oil companies are making plans to take advantage of the disappearing Arctic ice by 1) using the new Arctic shipping lanes to transport oil to markets, and 2) grabbing exploration rights to drill, drill, drill, in an area once impossible.

    Despite this, the oil lobby spends millions convincing people around the world that global warming is a hoax, a fraud, and is not happening. Their actions show their lies, and their hypocrisy. They will keep this up as long as it works.

    In case you are interested, the Arctic should see a serious melt back this summer, matching or exceeding the record year of 2007.

    • The PDO shift in 1977 was caused by CO2?

      • suyts says:

        You don’t realize how powerful that molecule can be!!!! I understand for its next trick, its going to start changing the tides. Its already been blamed for earthquakes………..

    • suyts says:

      “In case you are interested, the Arctic should see a serious melt back this summer, matching or exceeding the record year of 2007.”

      Are you sure you want to go there? I believe ice thickness is more now than in 2007. Also, ice extent is slightly more, as is ice area……… doubt it. But we’ll see.

      As to hypocrisy, how is the Koch bros. and big oil relevant to anything stated here? BTW, you ought to check again on which side of the game they’re playing.

    • Paul H says:

      I’ll see your Kochs and raise you 5 billion Soros’s.

    • nofreewind says:

      Gosh if it wasn’t for the oil companies brainwashing me, I would jump right in my $42,000 electric car and drive home right now. Then, when I got home tonight, I would put on that wood stove to heat that house up. But since I’m so brainwashed, I drive my old car home and then use the oil to heat the house tonight. And of course, if it wasn’t for the brainwashing from the coal company, I would just wait for the wind to blow or the sun to shine and then I would check my email. Those fossil fuel companies have me completely brainwashed!!!!

    • Latitude says:

      Whenever I would get upset at other people’s stupidity..
      ..my Mom used to tell me

      You should be thankful for stupid people…

      …you can look twice as smart with half the effort

      I’m a very thankful person……………

    • Mike Bromley says:

      “In case you are interested, the Arctic should see a serious melt back this summer, matching or exceeding the record year of 2007.”

      Can we quote you on that, Craig? That sounds like another Hansdiction.

  9. Old Goat says:

    I blame CO2 for my wife leaving me…

  10. mike williams says:

    Craig”hmm, more idiots talking to idiots. I will type r e a l slow, so some of you climate denying idiots will UNDERSTAND.”

    You have to be a complete FOOL to believe anyone denies “climate”.Ad hominems replace science..again..I will reply really slowly for those who prefer models over geological history.

    Craig”100,000 years ago is not very old, by climate standards. For the last 30 million years the Antarctic was frozen over. For the past several million years, CO2 NEVER got above 300ppm. We are now at 391ppm and rising about 2.5ppm per year.”

    Your right Craig..about 100,000 years..But the above statement is the standard pea and thimble alarmists game..Its not what you guys say, its what you guys don’t say..(is there some form of religious manual you people work off)?
    Allow me to help you.
    Late Carboniferous to Early Permian time (315 mya — 270 mya) is the only time period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperatures were as low as they are today Quaternary Period http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html
    That means Craig..CO2 levels were higher..for most of our geological history..

    Craig”No, I am not an alarmist.”
    What..????so you are just a confused alarmist/cynic who does no research and is denial..about being an alarmist..LOL

    • suyts says:

      I’m not sure who is the best example of a warmista? Bj, who swings by and writes a line or two and says nothing, but often or Craig, who swings by and babbles about stuff of which he obviously knows nothing about but writes a few paragraphs. Tough call.

  11. Andy Weiss says:

    Is Craig just BJ wearing another costume?

  12. Andy Weiss says:

    Craig and BJ have a similar condescending tone, but you are right, Craig at least acts like he knows something.

    What about Bugs Bunny? Was that BJ?

  13. Mike Bromley says:

    Nonetheless, the ad hominem becomes a bit wearysome.

  14. Clouseau says:

    Regarding the claim that oil companies can’t wait to drill drill drill in the arctic circle after it melts away: in case you weren’t paying attention, the BP oil disaster in the gulf was a case of BP drilling to sufficiently deep levels such that oil is found at sufficient pressure to cause failure in their blowout and containment equipment. It should be abvious to anyone who pays attention that oil is almost everywhere in massive quantities. Think of big oil as debeers. Look at “carbon trading” as a government instituted tax and regulation of supply to guarantee scarcity in the face abundance. Scarcity means high profit margin. UN regulation of supply means total lockdown of any non-conforming would be supplier.

  15. Sparks says:

    You are all wrong apparently!!

    “Atmospheric Carbon at a 15 Million Year High”
    http://echofrog.com/2011/03/22/atmospheric-carbon-at-a-15-million-year-high

Leave a Reply to Amino Acids in Meteorites Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s