Here's one right here!!!!
Yes sir...that thar is the cheef, hed, "climb-a-tolo-jist" fer sher!
Posted on 01/29/2009 3:02:05 PM PST by clyde_m
I've read a lot about things claimed by "Climatologists" but never saw a "Climatologist" degree. Since a constant refrain of global warming enthusiasts is to dismiss proffered scientific evidence that refutes man-made global warming as "not being written by a Climatologists," I thought I should study and find out just one is.
Let me cut to the chase scene for you: It's a job title, not an educational path. Translation: You, too, can be a Climatologist! But act now, and if you call within the next 20 minutes, we'll double the ...
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotroom.com ...
One could argue that Jimmy Buffet sitting on the beach sippin’ a marg’ is a climatologist.
I control the temp in my house do I qualify?
Climatologists are assistants to Crookologists. AKA Liberal politicians.
Climatologist rhymes with proctologist...sort of.
They’re the guys who know how to tweak weather data into computer “models” to make the data say anything they want it to say.
You’re gonna’ like my nuts, n’ ya’ know we can’t do this all day ... you follown’ me, cameraguy ??
Hint: It is someone who couldn’t handle four years of college to get a degree as a meteorologist.
It’s a guy with a degree who wasn’t good looking or glib enough to get a job on TV doing the weather.
Here's one right here!!!!
Yes sir...that thar is the cheef, hed, "climb-a-tolo-jist" fer sher!
It’s like a scientologist except their religion is the climate.
Took a course in “Climatology” in college. They used to call them “weathermen”, back in the day.
With all the bogus degrees handed out by universities these days, it shouldn’t be too long before a PHD in global-warming-ology is one of them. Given how long this bunk has been around, you’d think they’d have gotten there by now. The closest they’ve come is “Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering”? Really?
I took a meteorology course (I think they called it Atmospheric Science), thinking it would be a blow off course about clouds.
Had me calculating the amount of solar energy striking a angled roof on a specific day of the year.
I love it!
I’ve argued this point for quite a while, because I’ve yet to see one accomplishment from a climatologist.
Ah, but Climatologists have stated that 'climate' isn't the same as 'weather', although weather *is* a part of climate, 'climate' is much much MUCH more broad based than mere 'weather' ... this in an effort to explain why there is a deep freeze in southern regions in complete contradiction to the Global Warming™ consensus .... and and and ... oh never mind .....
Otherwise I was consulted on the above, so that would make me a Consultant of Climatology ..... /grin
What is a “Climatologist,” precisely?
Currently, it’s somebody who believe that you and I are causing global warming....
The graph above represents temperature and CO2 levels over the past 400,000 years. It is the same exact data Al Gore and the rest of the man-made global warmers refer to. The blue line is temps, the red, CO2 levels. The deep valleys represent 4 separate glaciation/ice-age periods. Look carefully at this historical relationship between temps and CO2 levels (the present is on the right hand side of the graph) and keep in mind that Gore claims this data is the 'proof' that CO2 has warmed the earth in the past. But does the data indeed show this? Nope. In fact, rising CO2 levels all throughout this 400,000-year period actually *followed* temperature increases -lagging behind by an average of 800 years! So it couldn't have been CO2 that got Earth out of these past glaciations. Yet Gore continually and dishonestly claims otherwise. Furthermore, the subsequent CO2 level increases due to dissolved CO2 being released from warming oceans, never did lead to additional warming, the so-called "run-away greenhouse effect" that Al Gore and his friends keep warning us about. In short, there is little if any evidence that CO2 had ever led to increased warming, at least not when the levels were within 10-15 times of what they are today. -etl
_______________________________________________________________
THE ACQUITTAL OF CARBON DIOXIDE
by Jeffrey A. Glassman, PhD
ABSTRACT:
"Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere [historically] is the product of oceanic respiration due to the well-known but under-appreciated solubility pump. Carbon dioxide rises out of warm ocean waters where it is added to the atmosphere. There it is mixed with residual and accidental CO2, and circulated, to be absorbed into the sink of the cold ocean waters. Next the thermohaline circulation carries the CO2-rich sea water deep into the ocean. A millennium later it appears at the surface in warm waters, saturated by lower pressure and higher temperature, to be exhausted back into the atmosphere. Throughout the past 420 millennia, comprising four interglacial periods, the Vostok record of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is imprinted with, and fully characterized by, the physics of the solubility of CO2 in water, along with the lag in the deep ocean circulation.
Notwithstanding that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, atmospheric carbon dioxide has neither caused nor amplified global temperature increases. Increased carbon dioxide has been an effect of global warming, not a cause. Technically, carbon dioxide is a lagging proxy for ocean temperatures. When global temperature, and along with it, ocean temperature rises, the physics of solubility causes atmospheric CO2 to increase.
If increases in carbon dioxide, or any other greenhouse gas, could have in turn raised global temperatures, the positive feedback would have been catastrophic. While the conditions for such a catastrophe were present in the Vostok record from natural causes, the runaway event did not occur. Carbon dioxide does not accumulate in the atmosphere."
http://www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/2006/10/co2_acquittal.html
_______________________________________________________________
"The above chart shows the range of global temperature through the last 500 million years. There is no statistical correlation between the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through the last 500 million years and the temperature record in this interval. In fact, one of the highest levels of carbon dioxide concentration occurred during a major ice age that occurred about 450 million years ago [Myr]. Carbon dioxide concentrations at that time were about 15 times higher than at present." [also see 180 million years ago, same thing happened]:
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=010405M
_______________________________________________________________
So, greenhouse [effect] is all about carbon dioxide, right?
Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds [clouds of course aren't gas, but high level ones do act to trap heat from escaping, while low-lying cumulus clouds tend to reflect sunlight and thereby help cool the planet -etl]. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what altitude it is found in the atmosphere.
In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect -- perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect (e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, 'Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models,' Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).
The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other 'minor greenhouse gases.' As an example of the relative importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2.
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/
_______________________________________________________________
Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System
Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect (4). Interestingly, many 'facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold.
Water vapor is 99.999% of natural origin. Other atmospheric greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and miscellaneous other gases (CFC's, etc.), are also mostly of natural origin (except for the latter, which is mostly anthropogenic).
Human activities contribute slightly to greenhouse gas concentrations through farming, manufacturing, power generation, and transportation. However, these emissions are so dwarfed in comparison to emissions from natural sources we can do nothing about, that even the most costly efforts to limit human emissions would have a very small-- perhaps undetectable-- effect on global climate.
Whoa! Geotechnical Engineering is a perfectly legitimate branch of civil engineering, dealing with soils. Very important in construction. I'm not so sure offhand about Geoenvironmental Engineering, but it probably involves things like cleanup of polluted soil and ground water.
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.