@Niolator

Quote:

when the sun returns to normal

eh? It's normal every single day.

Quote:

Could this be why the "natural causes proponents" have been so quiet about the sun lately?

Nope, you're just not looking in the right places.

Sun cycles run about 27 years. Sunspot activity began decline just a year or so ago. What... does everyone exspect the temp to drop globally in a few weeks if linked to solar cycles?

Quote:

Then we could be in real trouble.

The human race is already in trouble. If some how I could make the temperature exactly the same every-single-day-forever. Humans would still spend way too much time finguring out how to bash each other. This topic is just an excuse to fight some more.

The planet has been cooler than now, the planet has been warmer than now. Humans had no play in it. Can humans mess up the environment? You bet we can. But this warming/cooling cherry picking science (IMHO) is a diversion from the real topics of concern.

Plaz

@hatty

Quote:

A bunch of quotes relating to the intentions and agenda of some of the key players in this entire global warming farce. Click Here

The link tries to load www.green-agenda.com to no avail. Is this site up?

@BrianK

well, it loads fine here, but I'm in the UK.

Can anyone else in the States load the www.green-agenda.com site?

@hatty

Thanks. It works for me this morning.

@Thread

Just finished watching the Film 'An Unfortunate Truth'. It bangs the message home quite well! I can't help but think that unless,

A) We get global population increase under control.
B) Cut US Energy consumption shortly to a level at least in line with the EU/Japan.
C) Regulate Indian & Chinese expansion, offering them clean technologies with greater 'sweeteners' to buy it!
D) Stop farting about with selling carbon quotas etc and globally attack the problem.

Then we haven't got much of a hope saving Holland, Bangladesh or even the 9/11 memorial site!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

From 2000 - 2008 the Greenland Icesheet has lost 1500 Gigatons . During this time the loss continued to accelerate.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @Dandy Quote: For "my" solar panel continuous production through 24 hrs also would be no problem - in an appropriately calculated orbit the sun shines 24 h on all 365 days of the year - no clouds - nothing. Japan to power 300K homes from space

Yes - great!
More of that!

Quote:

BrianK wrote: As for 'nothing' don't forget about eclipses, though they are realitively short lived.

Point taken.

Quote:

BrianK wrote: Quote: Furthermore - if the orbit is calculated accordingly - it is possible to reduce the amount of sunlight that heats up desert areas. Seems a bit too far fetched this would have to be a large item (let's call it a shield).

Fully agreed.
That's exactly why I think such a project is far too big for one nation alone.

Quote:

BrianK wrote: This shield would need to be constructed which means more pollution on earth,

Not necessarily.
We already have technologies availyble to keep the pollution as low as possible.
I t would already be a big achievment if all electricity needed for the production would be green.

Quote:

BrianK wrote: a large consumption of natural resources,

In case you have the resources for solar cell production in mind:
Earth's crust consists of 25.8 % by weight of silicium.
The entire earth roughly consists of 15 % by mass of silicium.

Quote:

BrianK wrote: and the pollution to get it to space.

...could also be significantly reduced by using transporters based on the Sänger concept.

Quote:

BrianK wrote: I doubt there's enough money to make this a realistic project.

Hmmmmm - obviously there was enough money in the US alone to kick off the "Star Wars Project" during the Reagan administration - so I bet its just a matter of political will of the eligible nations...


Quote:

BrianK wrote: Quote: It could help the entire human race if we all could stop thinking within the confines of national boundaries. I disagree. Nature abhores a vacuum.

Not sure why you think nature hates vacuum.
After all most of nature consists of vacuum (i.e. interplanetar and interstellar space, not to mention the empty space between electrons and nucleii))...


Quote:

BrianK wrote: The world would be run by corporations.

Isn't that the case anyway?

Quote:

BrianK wrote: Quote: Also the method of transferring electricity wireless has to be improved in order to transfer the electricity from the orbit down to earth Not much improvement needed to a laser or maser.

AFAIK they use a different technique (i.e. microwaves) than lasers/masers for wireless electricity transmission...

EDIT:
Fixed quoting...

Last edited by Dandy on 16-Nov-2009 at 10:08 AM.
Last edited by Dandy on 16-Nov-2009 at 10:05 AM.

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@KimmoK

Quote:

KimmoK wrote: @Dandy >Although I really appreciate emission-free production of electricity at such a big scale, I would have preferred they did it with an solar panel in an orbit. >Admittedly this would be more expensive, but would have the advantage of keeping exactly that amount of solar energy away from planet earth, that we would use to produce electricity this way. You have got it wrong here. If energy is collected in space and transferred to earth to be used, it increase earth overheating by delivering even more energy to earth. UC, eventually all used energy tend to turn to heat, energy never disappears, it transforms.

Naahhh mate, YOU got ME wrong.
Of course surface based classic power stations will have to be switched off, once the electricity is being produced in the orbit.

And the electricity produced in the orbit would under no conditions generate more heat here on the surface if used than has been shielded away from earth by the solar panel that produces that electricity in the orbit.

Quote:

KimmoK wrote: >Keep in mind that from consuming electricity heat is always a by-product. Mainly it is the end product.

Sorry, no - its a by-product by definition.

Or is all that e.g. your computer does just heat production?
Or your TV-set?
Or your stereo equipment?
Are you left in the warm, but in the dark, if you swithch on the light at your home?

Quote:

KimmoK wrote: >The idea is to hinder that amount of heat from the sun to reach the surface, that is reased to the environment by using the electricity. So you mean that the solar panels in space would shadow earth?

Depending on the orbit - yes.

Quote:

KimmoK wrote: It is not possible because those solar panels need to be relatively stationary with the energy receiver antenna on earth.

No, they don't need to be on an geostationary orbit for that.
Does the moon need to be on an geostationary orbit to cast an shadow on earth during an eclipse?
Does an aeroplane that crosses the straight line between your eyes and the sun need to be on an geostationary orbit to cast an shadow on you in this very moment?

Use your imagination - as a true Amigan you should be able to do so...


Quote:

KimmoK wrote: So it needs to spin around (on a geo-stationary orbit) as earth spins around.

Sorry - no.
No need for that.

Quote:

KimmoK wrote: So it can not shadow earth (except for a few minutes per day or something like that).

And how about having several panels in orbit?
The shadow of the first crosses the desert area and while it leaves it, the shadow of the next panel just enters the desert area. This way a more or less continuous sun shielding can be achieved.

Quote:

KimmoK wrote: BUT. If those panels are on top of sahara desert (10m above the sand). They recycle the energy that already came to earth. Also they shadow the earth beneath the panel,

Naaahhhh - you didn't get the basics of my concept.

If you use solar cells to produce electricity, sun needs to shine on them.
If sunlight hits the solar cells, they are heated - up to 80-90 degrees Celsius here in my area. The solar cells dissipate this unwanted heat to the surrounding medium (air in this case) and so contribute to the global warming (we don't want that).

If you take these solar cells and put them outside earth's atmosphere, the heat generated from electricity production stays away from earth in space.
Furthermore they can serve as a sunshade - an appropriate orbit provided.

Quote:

KimmoK wrote: so plants would have better chance in surviving below the panel, instead of being in direct sun light.

Only if someone runs around to water them and only if it are plants that don't require direct sunlight.

Quote:

KimmoK wrote: >This way energy production would not contribute to the GW - rather in contrary - it could have a net "cooling effect" (as not all of the used electricity is transformed to heat - the other part is transformed to work and the "work part" has the "cooling effect"). There is no cooling possibility. ...

A sunshade is a cooling possibility.

Last edited by Dandy on 16-Nov-2009 at 10:17 AM.

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@hatty

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@hatty

Quote:

hatty wrote: btw, this link is for those even mildly sceptical about this entire "Global Warming" fantasy story. A bunch of quotes relating to the intentions and agenda of some of the key players in this entire global warming farce. Click Here The already fully brainwashed need not click.

Caution!
The link above has been debunked to be for realisation-resistant minds only!


I don't need IPPC or an US-amercan ex_vice-president like Al Gore to realise that the average temperature here im my area has been raising all my life (52 years).

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@Plaz

Quote:

Plaz wrote: @Niolator ... Sun cycles run about 27 years. ...

To my knowledge there are at least two "cycles".
One counts from a minimum to the next maximum, while the other counts from one minimum to the next minimum (also referred to as "complete" cycle").

The former (Schwabe-cycle) lasted 10.2 years averaged during the 20th century, while they lasted longer in previous ones; although the average value is 11.04 years there are also cycles that lasted 9 - 14 years.
The latter (also referred to as "Hale cycle" or "complete cycle") lasts 22 years.

Other assumptions not just come up with an 80-year-cycle (Gleißberg-cycle), but also have an additional 400 year cycle.

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

This is big: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/19/breaking-news-story-hadley-cru-has-apparently-been-hacked-hundreds-of-files-released/

I think there will be big consequences for global warming crowd if this data turns out to be real. I have looked at it myself and there is no way it could all be faked.

Last edited by Tomas on 20-Nov-2009 at 03:04 AM.
Last edited by Tomas on 20-Nov-2009 at 03:03 AM.

Here is the data for those who wants to check it out with their own eyes anyways: http://ftp.tomcity.ru/incoming/free/FOI2009.zip
Might be a good idea to use an Amiga for it though.. Just in case it contains virus or trojan.
Here is what the russians had to say about it anyways: Quote:

We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps. We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents. Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and the people behind it. This is a limited time offer, download now: http://ftp.tomcity.ru/incoming/free/FOI2009.zip Sample: 0926010576.txt * Mann: working towards a common goal 1189722851.txt * Jones: "try and change the Received date!" 0924532891.txt * Mann vs. CRU 0847838200.txt * Briffa & Yamal 1996: "too much growth in recent years makes it difficult to derive a valid age/growth curve" 0926026654.txt * Jones: MBH dodgy ground 1225026120.txt * CRU's truncated temperature curve 1059664704.txt * Mann: dirty laundry 1062189235.txt * Osborn: concerns with MBH uncertainty 0926947295.txt * IPCC scenarios not supposed to be realistic 0938018124.txt * Mann: "something else" causing discrepancies 0939154709.txt * Osborn: we usually stop the series in 1960 0933255789.txt * WWF report: beef up if possible 0998926751.txt * "Carefully constructed" model scenarios to get "distinguishable results" 0968705882.txt * CLA: "IPCC is not any more an assessment of published science but production of results" 1075403821.txt * Jones: Daly death "cheering news" 1029966978.txt * Briffa - last decades exceptional, or not? 1092167224.txt * Mann: "not necessarily wrong, but it makes a small difference" (factor 1.29) 1188557698.txt * Wigley: "Keenan has a valid point" 1118949061.txt * we'd like to do some experiments with different proxy combinations 1120593115.txt * I am reviewing a couple of papers on extremes, so that I can refer to them in the chapter for AR4

Updated story: http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-25061-Climate-Change-Examiner~y2009m11d20-ClimateGate--Climate-centers-server-hacked-revealing-documents-and-emails
Quote:

Britain’s Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia, suffered a data breach in recent days when a hacker apparently broke into their system and made away with thousands of emails and documents. The stolen data was then posted to a Russian server and has quickly made the rounds among climate skeptics. The documents within the archive, if proven to be authentic, would at best be embarrassing for many prominent climate researchers and at worst, damning. The electronic break in itself has been verified by the director of the research unit, Professor Phil Jones.

And now it has been confirmed fully: http://www.examiner.com/x-28973-Essex-County-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m11d20-CRU-director-admits-hacked-files-genuine
Quote:

In the most serious admission yet in the developing story of the hacking of the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, its director now admits that the content of the hacked files is in fact genuine and did indeed come from his organization.

@Tomas

AL GORE is a big,fat liar.

Global Warming is a scam.

The Earth has gone through many cycles of hot and cold long before man's little contributions.

@BigC
That has been my beliefs for the last few years as well.

@Tomas,

Seems as though Liberals and Socialists are always coming up with some "disaster" to tug at your heart strings, the childeren, the Polar bears, etc... ad nauseum to seperate the working people from their money.

I'll be glad when this scam goes down the toilet with the rest of them. It looks loke it's on the way.

Chris

Edit: I hope Government run health care goes down the tubes with it.

Last edited by QuikSanz on 20-Nov-2009 at 06:23 PM.

@Dandy

Quote:

I don't need IPPC or an US-amercan ex_vice-president like Al Gore to realise that the average temperature here im my area has been raising all my life (52 years).

yes, it's called natural temporal climatic change. it's an on going natural phenomena. no need to get scared and panic my friend, just relax. nature is one of those strange things in life which man does not have control over. real weather is not like some IPCC climate model which can be tweaked to suit our desires and agendas.

anyhow, your really should take a look at Tomas's CRU scandal link below.

do you feel a little bit gullible now? just a small incywinsy bit? Of course you don't, you'll just continue with your mental gymnastics, cherry picking meaningless IPCC computer model produced data on "CO2 levels" and allow the government to tax your #### into abject poverty and limit your freedoms even further...all in the name of "saving the earth" - which evidently does not need saving. Why? because you love to be a slave, you love to be feed BS because that way you are not forced to fight against it and to think for yourself. You can just sit back and let the media, government and bogus "scientists" do your thinking for you.

good luck.

Last edited by hatty on 20-Nov-2009 at 07:19 PM.
Last edited by hatty on 20-Nov-2009 at 07:18 PM.

@Tomas

just watch the relative media blackout on this one. i mean relative to the amount of hype and coverage given to "the lie". nothing will stop this media/government driven BS on Global Warming.

they have an agenda, and even this will not convince the brainwashed "Climate Change" sheeple that their world is NOT in danger of coming to an end and never was.

i've come to realize that some humans have an absurd ability to completely disregard reality.