83 years...
anyone else read of the 83 year gap re: CO2 concentration correlations (and lack thereof) between polar ice cap and mountain top levels?
http://www.john-daly.com/bull120.htm
http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2007/2007_10-19/2007-11/pdf/38_711_science.pdf
hmmnnn whaddya think?
anyone else read of the 83 year gap re: CO2 concentration correlations (and lack thereof) between polar ice cap and mountain top levels?
http://www.john-daly.com/bull120.htm
http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2007/2007_10-19/2007-11/pdf/38_711_science.pdf
hmmnnn whaddya think?
Hmmmm. When I worked at an appliance repair centre, I watched several refrigerators being re-gassed. The R12 (CFC) was released into a cylinder calibrated in fluid ounces. Typical units used about 12 ounces. Once the correct amount of gas was in the cylinder, it was released into the system by opening a valve. Gravity did the rest.
On the arrival of R134, the older systems had the R12/R22 recovered by means of letting the gas "fall" out of the system into a recycling bag. So this gas is heavy, yet we were led to believe it would float of into the atmosphere.
R134, the "modern" refrigerant, was delayed due to problems in finding a suitable lubricant. Strangely enough, that was "found" just prior to the patent expiring on it's older brother. It turned out to be vegetable oil of some type, that was stable with tetrafluoroethane.
That's what now keeps your beer cold. Scary isn't it.
R12 was dichlorodifluoromethane. R22 is Chlorodifluoromethane. and is about 3 times heavier than air at 21degC.
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCFC-22
With China having such a large population, they may well be the worlds largest refrigerator manufacture. I wonder what gas they use.
On the arrival of R134, the older systems had the R12/R22 recovered by means of letting the gas "fall" out of the system into a recycling bag. So this gas is heavy, yet we were led to believe it would float of into the atmosphere.
R134, the "modern" refrigerant, was delayed due to problems in finding a suitable lubricant. Strangely enough, that was "found" just prior to the patent expiring on it's older brother. It turned out to be vegetable oil of some type, that was stable with tetrafluoroethane.
That's what now keeps your beer cold. Scary isn't it.
R12 was dichlorodifluoromethane. R22 is Chlorodifluoromethane. and is about 3 times heavier than air at 21degC.
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCFC-22
With China having such a large population, they may well be the worlds largest refrigerator manufacture. I wonder what gas they use.
global warming & Al Gore
You all realize you're being led down the "garden path" by the political hacks and jerks here
Global warming may be real..... but it ain't because of anything mankind has done
The whole Freon debacle in the early '90's is a clasic example of "bad Scinece"... mark my words...
You all realize you're being led down the "garden path" by the political hacks and jerks here
Global warming may be real..... but it ain't because of anything mankind has done
The whole Freon debacle in the early '90's is a clasic example of "bad Scinece"... mark my words...
Re: Re: Re: 83 years...
Dude, seriously, turn Bill O'Riley off, and step away from the National Review. What will you be saying next? "Dey tuk err jerbs!" ???
(PS, if I am out of the loop and those two articles were intended as funny distractions, I must apologize in advance and admit that they were indeed funny, and I just didn't get the joke the first time.)
. . . and the flat tax is the most fair economic policy ever invented!!!!auplater said:
Dude, seriously, turn Bill O'Riley off, and step away from the National Review. What will you be saying next? "Dey tuk err jerbs!" ???
(PS, if I am out of the loop and those two articles were intended as funny distractions, I must apologize in advance and admit that they were indeed funny, and I just didn't get the joke the first time.)
Re: Re: Re: 83 years...
What if the solar system is, like, an atom in a molecule in a bigger universe that is so big, that we are subatomic particles on a subatomic particle in another universe that is so big we can't see what is going on in the big universe, and we are moving so fast relative to that other universe's time, that we can try as hard as we can to figure out that the other universe exists, but it's moving so slow we will never be able to figure out that we are inside of it, but if we look with a super huge microscope, we might be able to see the people on the atoms within OUR universe!!!!!
DOOD!!!!
Who baked brownies?
You think that was deep, consider this:auplater said:that's deep...
What if the solar system is, like, an atom in a molecule in a bigger universe that is so big, that we are subatomic particles on a subatomic particle in another universe that is so big we can't see what is going on in the big universe, and we are moving so fast relative to that other universe's time, that we can try as hard as we can to figure out that the other universe exists, but it's moving so slow we will never be able to figure out that we are inside of it, but if we look with a super huge microscope, we might be able to see the people on the atoms within OUR universe!!!!!
DOOD!!!!
Who baked brownies?
"(PS, if I am out of the loop and those two articles were intended as funny distractions, I must apologize in advance and admit that they were indeed funny, and I just didn't get the joke the first time.)"
There's a few unwritten rules with this thread.
There can't be distractions on this thread, it is a distraction in its own right.
Also, no apologies needed (unless you accidently and unfairly slander a mod, and don't want to go to Texas)
Last, but not least. Please point me to the joke. I must have missed it. I thought everything here was serious stuff.
I like your solar system concept. Similar to mine. Imagine for a moment you are an ant, living on a table, surviving on the crumbs those 3'6" giants leave behind. All on your own. In your two dimensional world. Going forwards, sometimes to the left, sometimes to the right, and occasionally backwards, when you reach lands end. You know every square inch of that table, 'cause there is nowhere else to go.
One day, a fly lands on the table. Do you disbelieve your eyes? Do you hide? (bit hard, unless they left some cake on the table) Do you turn a blind eye, hoping it will go away? Or, do you go up and say "Hello, where did you come from?"
There's a few unwritten rules with this thread.
There can't be distractions on this thread, it is a distraction in its own right.
Also, no apologies needed (unless you accidently and unfairly slander a mod, and don't want to go to Texas)
Last, but not least. Please point me to the joke. I must have missed it. I thought everything here was serious stuff.
I like your solar system concept. Similar to mine. Imagine for a moment you are an ant, living on a table, surviving on the crumbs those 3'6" giants leave behind. All on your own. In your two dimensional world. Going forwards, sometimes to the left, sometimes to the right, and occasionally backwards, when you reach lands end. You know every square inch of that table, 'cause there is nowhere else to go.
One day, a fly lands on the table. Do you disbelieve your eyes? Do you hide? (bit hard, unless they left some cake on the table) Do you turn a blind eye, hoping it will go away? Or, do you go up and say "Hello, where did you come from?"
Re: Re: Re: Re: 83 years...
lemme guess... you didn't actually READ the articles, did you? I thought not. Who's this O'Riley chap, anyway?
dfdye said:. . . and the flat tax is the most fair economic policy ever invented!!!!
Dude, seriously, turn Bill O'Riley off, and step away from the National Review. What will you be saying next? "Dey tuk err jerbs!" ???
(PS, if I am out of the loop and those two articles were intended as funny distractions, I must apologize in advance and admit that they were indeed funny, and I just didn't get the joke the first time.)
lemme guess... you didn't actually READ the articles, did you? I thought not. Who's this O'Riley chap, anyway?
Au, as someone who is agnostic on the whole global warming thing (I think there's very incomplete and poor quality data to be making useful conclusions), I was totally unimpressed with those papers myself. A real scientific paper is not published by a political organization (especially not a fringe group like the LaRouche folks) and does not use terms like "lies." The paper on the Daly site is slightly better, but is not refereed- one wonders why it was done that way instead of the normal peer-review process...
For a bit more dispassionate and rational contrary view of the global warming issue, albeit one that is just as incomplete and uncertain as everyone else is, I'd recommend Bjorn Lomborg's work.
For a bit more dispassionate and rational contrary view of the global warming issue, albeit one that is just as incomplete and uncertain as everyone else is, I'd recommend Bjorn Lomborg's work.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 83 years...
For the record, I haven't read a lot of climate research in the past few years. I sort of got burned out after spending a year on the US National Debate Tournament circuit researching at all of the nooks and crannies of the climate change "debate." (For the record, all of the smart people are on one side of the discussion, and all of the corporate interests and their minions are on the other. Guess which side is which.)
There is no way I will even attempt to get into a warming debate online, but I will mock those who advocate anti-science, even if they wrap it up in a nice package. Remember, a flaming brown paper bag of dog poo smells no worse than a nicely packaged, gift wrapped box of dog poo.
Enjoy.
Woopsie, I can't spell. He is this nutjob. And I say this being someone who quite respects Goldwater, so there is no disrespect for intelligent conservative political ideologies here. I only disrespect idiots.auplater said:
For the record, I haven't read a lot of climate research in the past few years. I sort of got burned out after spending a year on the US National Debate Tournament circuit researching at all of the nooks and crannies of the climate change "debate." (For the record, all of the smart people are on one side of the discussion, and all of the corporate interests and their minions are on the other. Guess which side is which.)
There is no way I will even attempt to get into a warming debate online, but I will mock those who advocate anti-science, even if they wrap it up in a nice package. Remember, a flaming brown paper bag of dog poo smells no worse than a nicely packaged, gift wrapped box of dog poo.
Enjoy.