P. J. Alling wrote: > Actually CO2 is a lousy greenhouse gas. The really strong greenhouse > gas is water vapor, (partly because there's so much of it in the > atmosphere). It's just much easier to model CO2 which has much less > complex interactions. However climate change models based on CO2 > studies are so flawed as to be useless for prediction. More > interestingly NASA has been shamed by an amateur Canadian researcher > into revising it's temperature data for the last 50 years due to an > incorrect normalization procedure. Not that it gets a lot of publicity, > (enough that it should be like a nagging low level tooth ache maybe for > the Global Warming Fans), or gets much credence from the Global Warming > fanatics, in fact is discounted by some who should know better because > it doesn't fit their prejudices. Using the newly re-corrected NASA data > the 10 hottest years on record are no longer in the later half of he > 20th century, but mostly in in the first half. This was known before > Former VP Al, got the Nobel Peace Prize, (and you have to wonder, if you > read the selection criteria for that prize the selection board should > all be fired), for his movie. The inconvenient truth of which is that > much of the premise, and supporting evidence was just plain wrong, but > that never stopped a good story before. If you dig into the model used > by Discovery you'll probably find it's based on a CO2 model and uses the > correspondence to the uncorrected NASA data for it's corroboration.
Presumably this site will have the newest data? http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/earthandsun/climate_change.html keith -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
