March 14, 2006

That's some high quality H2O

Greenhouse theory smashed by biggest stone
It seems Russian scientist Vladimir Shaidurov doesn't buy into the doom and gloom hype of global warming. All to the better, I think. I'm not going to pass judgment just yet, but I think this guy's got something goin' here. Global Warming is a term used to instill fear into the hearts of big bad greenhouse gas expellers (i.e.: Americans, Chinese, Arabians, most of Europe, Asia... Pretty much the human populated world). However, if there aren't many humans populating some areas of the world, for example the Arctic, Antarctica, and so on... How is it that greenhouse gas expellers are putting out enough minor green house gases (as described in the linked story above as anything other than water vapor) to effect melting of ice burgs more than half a world away? I knew that the math didn't add up, but I'm glad someone smarter than me is able to put it into words people might listen too.


tammo21 said...

To these types of people, the natural cycle of the ozone layer opening and closing around the poles is a lie, even if it's true. Read my rant on why the earth will always win, and you'll see how arrogant it is to assume that us humans can destroy a planet that has seen a hundred million years of natural abuse, like asteroids, ice ages, volcanic activity and so on.

Personally I think it has something to do with the magnetic field. If I'm right and the fields reverse like they're due to do, then the new stronger fields at the two poles will repel solar winds more effectively than humans have ever seen. But the libs still probably won't agree with it. They'll say it's due to e85 or something (which by the way pollutes far worse than gasoline.) So what's your take on my completely unscientifically founded theory, mr physics?

The JimP said...

The advent of E85 wasn't to limit emissions. We're trying to limit the amount of gasoline we burn. Because it takes more power to produce the ethanol in E85 than the volume produced replaces in the E85 formula you are right in saying that it pollutes more than gasoline alone. However, with further advancement in the production of ethanol in the future ethanol could replace gasonline as a fuel, and since it is renewable we could potentially export it.

About the magnetic field of the planet shifting... Theoretically it is possible, but I haven't read anything that says it has happened or will happen. If you have, I'd like to read what you have to see for myself.

However, I do see an increase in the strength of the magnetic field which unfortunately coinsides with the solar minimum, which is about 8 years away. Our planet will be at its strongest against the ravages of the sun when it isn't necessary to be. The solar cycle is 11 years long (11 up to max, 11 down to min). About three years ago we were dealing with solar maximum. There were widespread power outages, communications errors (mostly satellite related and LORAN) and the like. This is because of the inverted ratio of the strength of the planet's magnetic field in relation to the solar maximum. However, Liberals on the whole aren't so well educated as to take this into account, since either it would hurt their position, or because they're not interested in a 22 year full cycle. As we have just come off the solar max, and our magnetic field is building itself back up again it would stand to reason that our global temps would decrease just a bit as we move further away from the max. Science is a Liberal's worst enemy.

tammo21 said...

saw it on a Nova episode, they ran a computer simulation, and when they weren't looking, the magnetic field shifted. They also found geological evidence of the field being reversed a few thousand decades ago.