Comments on: Climate-change alarm supported by some medical journals—but not by the evidence

By: Dr. Robert L Hamilton, Engineer

Dr. Robert L Hamilton, Engineer — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:30:00 +0000

If anyone is interested in the climate for the past 400,000+ years look here:

http://www.utdallas.edu/~roberth/vostok_R3.html

After /~ the server is case sensitive.

By: Dr. Robert L Hamilton, Engineer

Dr. Robert L Hamilton, Engineer — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:10:22 +0000

Isaac Newton warned us about such as ‘global warming:’ “. . . we are certainly not to relinquish the evidence of our experiments and observations for the sake of dreams and vain fictions of our own devising.

Principia: Part III; System of the Worlld.

By: BBOBH

BBOBH — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 02:21:40 +0000

Mr. Larry Mallette
“The is no doubt that global warming is occurring. The northwest passage is open! Climatologists are speculating that the North Pole may not remain frozen by summer’s end.

The uncertainty lies only in the extent to which human activity is contributing, as opposed to natural variations in the sun’s intensity. ”

Do we know that the NW passage has never been open before?
There is no uncertainty about our contribution to the CO2 in the air; it is effectively nil. . .

Robert L Hamilton

By: Dr. Robert L Hamilton, Engineer

Dr. Robert L Hamilton, Engineer — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:02:06 +0000

Two strands of the thin thread of GW are the graphs of Manley and Keeling. The former, called the Hockey Stick, was deconstructed and is no longer used in the IPCC blurbs. It simply failed to agree with our observations and historical records around the planet; it did not make sense. The other graph, the Keeling curve shows a CO2 increase from 315 parts per million by volume to 385 ppmv over a forty-eight year period. This would require an annual addition of over 5X10**13 pounds. If, as some think, about half our contribution is sequestered, the Keeling curve would require 10**14 pounds per year which is quite preposterous! Keeling made his measurements around the most active volcano region on the planet. He never returned my calls; I think he knew ‘what he was doing.’ Keeling died a few years ago and I think his son is continuing the measurements. GW is based on the most fallacious conjectures.

By: Jack Jennings, PE

Jack Jennings, PE — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:54:29 +0000

How true! Its about time that someone puts scientific sense, and measurement, behind this “movement” instead of unfounded nonsense.

I do not believe that our planet has been hanging on a less than 1% thread for so long.

By: Dr. Robert L Hamilton, Engineer

Dr. Robert L Hamilton, Engineer — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:52:15 +0000

For the past two or three decades we have been inundated with predictions of impending doom. This catastrophe will be due to Global Warming and the operative culprit will be a common, minute component of the atmosphere, CO2. This gas exists in the earth’s atmosphere to the extent of about 5X(10)**15 pounds and it is thought that each year our industrial activities produce about 5X(10)**12 pounds so that the annual anthropogenic addition is certainly less than 1% of the total. This additive amount is far less than the measured variation in CO2 content from time to time and from place to place around the earth. It is certainly not substantially different than the error in measurements of the CO2 content of air. All this was known 100 years ago. How can any educated person not know these facts? Stay tuned. . .
Moderator: May I continue this rant from time to time?

By: Dr. Robert L Hamilton, Engineer

Dr. Robert L Hamilton, Engineer — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:26:45 +0000

Anthropogenic global warming comports with neither Physics, arithmetic nor our common observations about the planet. The temperature of the surface of the earth is not controlled by radiation but by convection. Water is evaporated by heat from the sun; this requires energy and that energy is carried high into the atmosphere where the energy is released as the water vapor condenses to rain or ice. Global warmers seem to think CO2 absorbs radiant energy which is radiated back to earth thereby warming it. Say a molecule in a leaf in one of my Pecan trees radiates a bit of energy skyward to be intercepted by a CO2 molecule which radiates the energy earthward. What’s wrong with this ’scenario?’ The molecule in the tree cooled a bit and the CO2 could not radiate more energy back to ground than it received from the leaf. This is Thermo101/102.

By: woody sparrow

woody sparrow — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 19:44:29 +0000

it is my understanding that the earth was warming at a greater rate in the 1930’s than it is today. i seartainly do recall my childhood of the 1970’s,when many adults as well as school teachers were informing me that we were in fact heading into an ice age. well we are now being bombarded with this big threat of ‘global warming’ it seems quite elementary to me that it is nothing but onother change in the cycles of the earth’s climate. woody sparrow

By: Texas Medical

Texas Medical — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:04:12 +0000

Great information! Thanks for writing this. It is an honor to participate in the discussion.

By: Larry Mallette

Larry Mallette — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 19:16:28 +0000

The is no doubt that global warming is occurring. The northwest passage is open! Climatologists are speculating that the North Pole may not remain frozen by summer’s end.

The uncertainty lies only in the extent to which human activity is contributing, as opposed to natural variations in the sun’s intensity.

By the time we are certain about this, it will be too late to do anything about it if the anthropogenic hypothesis is correct after all. If fact, it’s probably too late already…

So get ready for hot weather. How hot? Hmmm…..