Posted on 02/08/2015 8:59:22 PM PST by OldNavyVet
My dictionary tells me that "absolute zero" is -459.69 F.
The fact is ... that global warming has temperatures around us in the vicinity of 530 degrees Fahrenheit above absolute zero ... assuming a 70 degree F environment.
But they will.
Do you know, has any of the consensus scientists published anything describing the optimal planetary temperature and what they propose to do to obtain that temperature stasis?
Earth's temperature profile over time is very noisy.
The global warming alarmists are busily studying the noise and making (foolish) predictions based on it.
The idea that it is primarily man-made, and related to post-Industrial Revolution air pollution, etc. is simply ridiculous. The last few hundred years are a tiny drop in the bucket compared to what has gone on in the past 20,000, 200,000, or 2,000,000 years, never mind the 200,000,000 that preceded that. Earth's temperature rose and fell dramatically, swamping all the recent changes that allegedly spell doom for mankind.
What a bunch of stupid monkey poo.
I don’t know about the temperature, but I heard they want to change Earth’s orbit from parabolic to circular, and eliminate the tilt of the planet. That way, everything will stay the same all the time.
Oh... and they need like a bagizillion dollars for grants to study about how to do this.
P.S. They also might have to eliminate some of the larger planets because they might disturb our new orbit, so.... you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette.
Not to my knowledge, but there is one scientist that gives us a lot of Earth's temperature history. That author is Steve Jones, the author of "Darwin's Ghost," a modern update of Darwin's "Origin of Species,
Among other things relevant about Earth's temperature history, Jones writes ... on page 231 ...
"Five hundred million years ago the air had twenty times as much carbon dioxide as it contains now. This led to a natural 'greenhouse effect' which was reversed two hundred million years later when the level of the gas dropped."
It's a great read.
so the reality is the opposite...that is global cooling...
so why would they lie...? Just putting into into place Obama's buddy Bill Ayres dream...
When Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn led the domestic terrorist group Weather Underground in 1969, a chance meeting led Army veteran Larry Grathwohl into joining the group. Grathwohl served as a courier, running messages between the group’s leadership (called the “Weather Bureau”) and individual cells that were to carry out attacks.
Grathwohl was also an informant for the FBI.
In an interview from the 1982 documentary No Place To Hide that recently surfaced, Grathwohl discussed what the Weathermen intended to do after overthrowing the U.S. government, including what they would do with those Americans who refused to embrace communism.
I asked, “Well what is going to happen to those people we can’t reeducate, that are diehard capitalists?” And the reply was that they’d have to be eliminated.
And when I pursued this further, they estimated they would have to eliminate 25 million people in these reeducation centers.
And when I say “eliminate,” I mean “kill.”
Twenty-five million people
So preparing for fake global warming ..including shutting off supplies of electricity ...will accomplish Bill Ayers dream when global cooling kicks in.
(my backyard today)
No we are not. The Quaternary ice age has at least 2 million years before we leave our present ice age.
If they global warming people where right they should be happy to extend our interglacial longer then it naturally should be. I personally WISH they were right. Our interglacial optimum is coming to and end soon geographically speaking.
I understand you meant to say, "mini-ice age." It is a term that really should be eliminated from the English language. Which really is slight change in temperatures in our interglacial period.
I might be getting off track here:
If the earth had no heat at its core it would be at -459.69 F. The sun warms the crust of the earth but the radiant heat from our core helps maintain our temperature. Other wise the core would be a heat sink.
Every scientist I have ever talked maintains the earth only contributes about 10% of our heat. I don't believe that it's that low.
Global warming, etc., has been fantastic at decreasing US usage of US-mined coal.
This is been wonderful for then providing a resource of coal for China’s electric power plants, since, the US, well, was not using its own coal.
Life is real clear from the view of the top elites.
From scientific evidence, the Earth goes through cycles between oxygen and CO2. It goes like this:
Through photosysthesis, CO2 is used by plant life and blue green algae (cycanobacteria). These we can call the photosynthesizers. As free oxygen is released into the atmosphere atmospheric CO2 is being depleted. If photosynthesis uses too much CO2 the Earth cools due to CO2’s reduced green house effect. As this cooling effect progresses, the Earth could get so cold that all life would no longer exist. The Earth would become frozen in ice with a high amount of atmospheric oxygen and CO2 levels so low that there would be little greenhouse effect. Luckily, this does not happen because there are what they call, methanogens which utilize the waste products and leftovers of the photosynthesizers for their metabolism and generate methane and carbon dioxide as a byproduct. They also create that organic stuff call petrochemicals. This balance between the photosynthesizers and the methanogens is the true story of the Earth’s temperature regulation.
If the Earth gets too warm, due to an increase in solar activity, the photosynthesizers kick in because increased temperatures promote their growth. As the oceans fill up with more algae and there is more plant life, more CO2 is being used. They will continue in the feast mode until they cause the Earth to chill. This reduction in temperature is not conducive to the photosynthesizers. Their growth will slow and reach that equilibrium when the optimum Earth’s temperature is reached. In short, we all don’t need to buy electric cars to combat global warming. We can let the photosynthesizers and the methanogens do the work for us.
Yep, more or less, and I agree that the term is largely nonsense. But it is somewhat more effective in conversation than merely waving my hands and saying "Look, any trend less than about 10,000 years long is just noise in the overall patterns", since most people have trouble wrapping their minds around long periods like 10,000 years, much less a million or more years. Hell, most people have trouble with 500 years. :)
“In short, we all don’t need to buy electric cars to combat global warming. We can let the photosynthesizers and the methanogens do the work for us.”
Now how are we going to stop capitalism with that nonsense?
As an aside, there may not be an "absolute zero" because whenever science says it is a certain number someone figures a way to drop the temperature even lower and then it's that number.
It may be that mankind doesn't have the intellectual capacity to comprehend some of these things...
Absolute zero is ... "the temperature at which matter has no heat and its molecules are completely still; theoretically, the lowest possible temperature: equal to about -273.16°C or about -459.69°F or 0°K"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/a/absolute_zero.htm.
...which means they haven't yet achieved a state where molecules are completely still. I know I'm picking at nits but I find it interesting...as I hope you do.
Thank you for the link. I’m very much interested in science and spent most of my working life doing failure analysis ... Navy day’s, and then after college ... defense industry years.
They can try and stop Capitalism with their red diapers, dope and whistling Dixie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.