The CO2 fantasy

North Korea test was 20 times stronger than the Horoshima and Nagasaki bomb? Hiroshima was destroyed using a Uranium bomb, Nagasaki was bombed using plutonium. So what is North Korea testing plutonium or uranium? And what’s the difference in terms of devastation? Which is worse? Let’s not forget that the Taliban is near to taking over nuclear Pakistan. Pakistan, N.Korea, Iran have leaders that are either religious fanatics or nuts. Throw in Israel wanting to take out nuclear facilities in Iran and can it be long?I believe we will see great troubles before the year is out on several different fronts. One nuclear bomb goes off and the world economy and financial markets will collapse. Pretty amazing that they can do nuke testing underground these days. Maybe they should of though about the health risks though. Surely its going to kill people off in the area. Even in Gaza, Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries where Depleted Uranium is used in the bombs people are dying with the Uranium Dust. 20 Times stronger than Hiroshama sounds about the same as an Thermal Nuclear bomb in stock by a small country to the east. North Korea tests nuclear weapon ‘as powerful as Hiroshima bomb’Country risks further international isolation as underground nuclear explosion triggers earthquake. North Korea today risked further international isolation after it claimed to have successfully tested a nuclear weapon as powerful as the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima.The test comes less than two months after the North enraged the US and its allies by test firing a long-range ballistic missile.The KNCA news agency, the regime’s official mouthpiece, said:“We have successfully conducted another nuclear test on 25 May as part of the republic’s measures to strengthen its nuclear deterrent.”Officials in South Korea said they had detected a tremor consistent with those caused by an underground nuclear explosion. The country’s Yonhap news agency reported that the North had test-fired three short-range missiles from a base on the east coast immediately after the nuclear test.

The underground atomic explosion, at 9.54am local time (0154 BST), created an earthquake measuring magnitude 4.5 in Kilju county in the country’s north-east, reports said. President Barack Obama called the test a matter of grave concern to all countries.“North Korea is directly and recklessly challenging the international community,” he said in a statement.“North Korea’s behaviour increases tensions and undermines stability in north-east Asia.” He added that North Korea’s behaviour would serve only to deepen the country’s isolation.“It will not find international acceptance unless it abandons its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery,” he said.
The UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, said he was “deeply worried” by the development.The UN security council will hold an emergency meeting in New York later today to discuss its response to the latest escalation in the crisis. Obama and other leaders did not offer details on the council’s possible response. China, North Korea’s key ally, said it was “resolutely opposed” to the test, urging its neighbour to avoid actions that would sharpen tensions and return to six-party arms-for-disarmament talks. Japan, which considers itself high on the North’s potential hit list, said it would seek a new resolution condemning the test. Russian defence experts estimated the explosion’s yield at between 10 and 20 kilotons, many times more than the 1 kiloton measured in its first nuclear test in 2006 and about as powerful as the bombs the US used against Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of the second world war. One kiloton is equal to the force produced by 1,000 tonnes of TNT. The force of the blast made the ground tremble in the Chinese border city of Yanji, 130 miles away. The North Korean news agency said the test had been “safely conducted on a new higher level in terms of its explosive power and technology of its control. The test will contribute to defending the sovereignty of the country and the nation and socialism and ensuring peace and security on the Korean peninsula and the region.” Gordon Brown described the test as “erroneous, misguided and a danger to the world”. The prime minister added:“This act will undermine prospects for peace on the Korean peninsula and will do nothing for North Korea’s security.” South Korea condemned the test, North Korea’s second since it exploded its first nuclear device in October 2006 in defiance of international opinion. That test prompted the UN to pass a resolution banning Pyongyang from activities related to its ballistic missile programme. The South Korean president, Lee Myung-bak, convened a session of the country’s security council after seismologists reported earthquakes in the Kilju region, site of the North’s first nuclear test.

Fair Game wrote:

Your ignorant denial is an insult to the whole of humanity- at least those people who recognised the CFC problem and worked together to solve it...

If it's solved, why is there still an ozone hole?

http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratos...

Cousin Jethro wrote:

<quoted text>
Now, now, you're talking to a blank wall -- remember, Brian is still looking for assurance that there is a subject called, "science," he's a little slow :-)

I kind of hope the bill passes just so you worthless libs can see the destruction of the economy firsthand. So you might want to take this time and go cut some firewood for the winter. Because without power you can not run your furnace. Or your appliances. And trust me those bills will go up. And you can forget about the so called rebate. The government has not ran anything efficient as of yet. And never will.

-Sustainability is liberal for poverty.

-Climate Changes is liberal for weather (it changes).

-Global Warming is the liberal WMD scam.

-Global Warmers, Climate Changers, Climate Pu$$ies, Climate Cowards, Glowbull

-Whiners and Glowbull Warm-Mongers are the new Greenzis circa Germany 1939.

-History will curse this embarrassing time in civilization where we went back 4000 years to believe the natural world revolves around us mortal humans. Ug! Ug!
-God help us.

Recent Ignored Research Findings In Climate Science - An Illustration Of A Broken Scientific Method

This weblog lists three research findings that are in the peer reviewed literature, but have been completely ignored by the IPCC and CCSP climate assessment communities, nor have been refuted in the literature. These are just three examples of the level to which the scientific method has sunk to in climate science.

* Observations of the spatial distribution of aerosols in the atmosphere in the lower latitudes, shows that the aerosol effect on atmospheric circulations, as a result of their alteration in the heating of regions of the atmosphere, is 60 times greater than due to the heating effect of the human addition of well-mixed greenhouse gases [from Matsui and Pielke, 2006];
* A conservative estimate of the warm bias in the construction of a global average surface temperature trend resulting from measuring the air temperature near the ground is around 0.21°C per decade (with the nighttime minimum temperature contributing a large part of this bias). Since land covers about 29% of the Earth’s surface, the warm bias due to this influence explains about 30% of the IPCC estimate of global warming. In other words, consideration of the bias in temperature would reduce the IPCC trend to about 0.14°C per decade; still a warming, but not as large as indicated [based on Lin et al 2007];
* The radiative temperature of the Earth is used by the IPCC and CCSP to represent the portion of the radiation emitted at the top of the atmosphere which originates at the Earth’s surface. However, the outgoing long wave radiation is proportional to the fourth power of T [T4], from Stefan-Boltzman’s Law, not temperature by itself. A 1C increase in the polar latitudes in the winter, for example, would have much less of an effect on the change of long wave emission than a 1C increase in the tropics. The spatial distribution matters, but this important distinction has been ignored. A more appropriate measure of radiatively significant surface changes would be to evaluate the change of the global average of T4 with time.[Pielke et al 2007].

Until, and unless the climate science community returns to the proper scientific method of examining the climate system, policymakers will continue to be fed erroneous information. Only poor policy decisions can result due to this failure.

http://climatesci.org/2008/07/15/recent-ignor...

mememine69 wrote:

-Sustainability is liberal for poverty.
-Climate Changes is liberal for weather (it changes).

Do you LOVE showing off your ignorance like this?'Climate' is the average of 'weather'. They are not the same.

If it is only liberals who can understand this simple concept, then maybe it is high time for you to change your political affiliation;)

Climate isn't average weather, climate is the system that moves heat from the equator, where sunlight strikes full on, to the poles where sunlight glances by. There are microclimates, local climates and the global climate. Microclimates, like the urban heat island effect, might be the only significant manmade climate change, we'll never know until we do some experimental tests.

MattJ wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you LOVE showing off your ignorance like this?'Climate' is the average of 'weather'. They are not the same.
If it is only liberals who can understand this simple concept, then maybe it is high time for you to change your political affiliation;)

Liberals can ONLY understand simple concepts.

Brian_G wrote:

Climate isn't average weather, climate is the system that moves heat from the equator, where sunlight strikes full on, to the poles where sunlight glances by. There are microclimates, local climates and the global climate. Microclimates, like the urban heat island effect, might be the only significant manmade climate change, we'll never know until we do some experimental tests.

Experimental tests can't help you, if you can't even get the relevant definitions right. And sure enough, true to form, you got the definition completely wrong at the very beginning of your demented parrot post!

But what was truly incredible is that your post went so rapidly downhill from such a bad start:(

Mothra wrote:

<quoted text>
Liberals can ONLY understand simple concepts.

Heh;) Judging from your example, that is far more concepts than you AGW denialists can handle;)

Most of the heat carried by climate isn't in the atmosphere, its in ocean currents. These fools who think we can predict the climate 100 years from now, or restore an ideal climate Eden, like before the industrial age have no idea what the real world is like.

Go for a walk, look at the skeletons of ancient glaciers we call ponds and lakes, look at the landscape carved by ice, rain and wind and you will know, nothing is more powerful than climate, not even man.

MattJ wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you LOVE showing off your ignorance like this?'Climate' is the average of 'weather'. They are not the same.
If it is only liberals who can understand this simple concept, then maybe it is high time for you to change your political affiliation;)

Why is it only the libs that believe this bogus science? WHY? Because you are all stupid and GULLIBLE!!!

MattJ wrote:

<quoted text>
Heh;) Judging from your example, that is far more concepts than you AGW denialists can handle;)

Matt I have read many of your posts. But have not went to one link you have left. I wonder why you keep denouncing everyone's post that doe not believe in GW. You always say we are just denialists, but you have yet to give us any proof of GW except to post another link to another so called scientist that has been debunked by the other side. It is you who has no knowledge of the science. You can not give us anything concrete in the way of GW because it does not exist. But I am sure you will comeback with another link to youtube or another link to Al Gores site. So why don't you give us some of your science if you can. I personally do not htink you know shit. So it should be interesting.

Brian_G wrote:

Most of the heat carried by climate isn't in the atmosphere, its in ocean currents. These fools who think we can predict the climate 100 years from now, or restore an ideal climate Eden, like before the industrial age have no idea what the real world is like.
Go for a walk, look at the skeletons of ancient glaciers we call ponds and lakes, look at the landscape carved by ice, rain and wind and you will know, nothing is more powerful than climate, not even man.

Sounds like a travelogue written by a fundamentalist during the Eisenhower administration...

Robert wrote:

<quoted text>
I kind of hope the bill passes just so you worthless libs can see the destruction of the economy firsthand. So you might want to take this time and go cut some firewood for the winter. Because without power you can not run your furnace. Or your appliances. And trust me those bills will go up. And you can forget about the so called rebate. The government has not ran anything efficient as of yet. And never will.

You hadn't noticed the recent meltdown of the world Economy? Where had you been sleeping -- or just too much CO2 in your intake?

Robert wrote:

<quoted text>
Matt I have read many of your posts. But have not went to one link you have left.

Then that explains why you wallow in your ignorance.

I wonder why you keep denouncing everyone's post that doe not believe in GW.

If you would actually visit one of the sites, you just might have been able to figure it out.

You always say we are just denialists,

And you are.

but you have yet to give us any proof of GW except to post another link to another so called scientist that has been debunked by the other side.

How would you know? By your own admission, you have never VISITED one of the links!

It is you who has no knowledge of the science.

Not true.

You can not give us anything concrete in the way of GW because it does not exist.

Also not true.

But I am sure you will comeback with another link to youtube or another link to Al Gores site

You could not be more wrong. I never use EITHER Youtube or Gore's site.

All these gross misstatements of yours show you simply have not been paying attention. Yet you have so much criticism of what you have not even begun to understand!

That is the mark of a completely uneducated man.

Robert wrote:

<quoted text>
Why is it only the libs that believe this bogus science? WHY? Because you are all stupid and GULLIBLE!!!

No, rather, you who believe the neocon, anti-science talking points of Sen. Inhofe and that King of Blowhards Rush Limbaugh are the gullible ones.

Robert wrote:

<quoted text>
You always say we are just denialists, but you have yet to give us any proof of GW except to post another link to another so called scientist that has been debunked by the other side. It is you who has no knowledge of the science. You can not give us anything concrete in the way of GW because it does not exist.

First, I am NOT MattJ. Let me say you wrote a miserably poor post.

I culled the above portion to address here.

What would you consider as proof? What do you call anything concrete?

You see science is a continuum. In a limited space as in a Topix post, how musch one can tell to people unknown asking or demanding or cursing? One has to interpret what the person is seeking.

In your case, it is obvious you don't know any science. You are unaducated and unable to write in good language what you are trying to communicate. Futhermore, you are using the designated words of the AGW deniers like proof or concrete.

All in all, you are a michief-maker. I have no idea why you have chosen this path instead of one of reason and science.

Remember: AGW is REAL. We must reduce CO2 emissions for our own good.

MattJ wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you LOVE showing off your ignorance like this?'Climate' is the average of 'weather'. They are not the same.
If it is only liberals who can understand this simple concept, then maybe it is high time for you to change your political affiliation;)

Excellent point and the weather over the last 23 years of climate for the theory proves that global warming was a huge mistake. Thanks for that my politically correct and obedient warmie.