|
 |
Newsgroups: alt.politics.socialism.trotsky, uk.politics.environment, sci.environment, alt.global-warming, talk.politics.mideast
From: Steve Wallis <revolutionarysocialistst...@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 07:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sun 10 Aug 2008 15:24
Subject: Global dimming and ice age predictions after WW2 contradict global warming theory
I've been involved in a long debate about solar power (particularly
concentrating solar power/solar thermal energy) versus nuclear power, mainly with the pro-nuclear socialist David Walters, but another pro- nuclear socialist called Fran has recently joined in, on alt.politics.socialism.trotsky in the thread "Guardian: Solar power from Sahara could provide Europe's electricity, says EU". Others, including David, thought that crossposting on these issues On 10 Aug, 13:19, Fran <Fran.B...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Aug 10, 4:11 am, Steve Wallis <revolutionarysocialistst...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: I did find out about the sulphur claim (I wasn't sure it was SO2 and > > I've had some doubts about my position on global warming, but finding > > out that the weather got colder during the post-war boom (despite the > > increasing levels of carbon dioxide due to industrialisation) > Google "global dimming" for the effect of SO2 on global temperatures thought I'd wait for somebody else to mention it), when doing earlier browsing. I was sceptical then and still am now of this explanation. Isn't it amazing that you get all this talk of global warming and yet very little mention of the fact that temperatures did increase after the second world war. Obviously, those who agree with global warming need some sort of explanation when pushed to justify their theory, but they generally don't want to mention global dimming and SO2 (and I didn't find out about the SO2 explanation until I read a critique of "The Great Global Warming Swindle"). > > and I did Google "global dimming" as you suggested and came across the > > another ice age was predicted by scientists reinforced my view. > Another meme put about by deniers. Even at the "height" (if that is Wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming. The graph on that page, which takes data from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_temperature_record, does not show dimming for anything like the period 1943-74 - in fact it's only in the 1940s according to those graphs. Critics of "The Great Global Warming Swindle" such as George Monbiot > > [I I did discover that the person responsible for that programme is > > remember this at the time but I'd forgotten about it until reminded by > > the Channel 4 TV programme "The Great Global Warming Swindle" > This was put about by a self-styled swindler of the Thatcher and Hayek- linked to LM, and found a page with an interview the day after the programme went out on their current Spiked project website, but he and they claim that he is not a member of the ex-RCP. I disagree with a lot of the ideas that that organisation/ex- > You need to stop believing the first thing you read on the internet. I don't. I've researched global warming theory quite a lot and found > Fran arguments against global warming more convincing than those in support of it. When you tell people that China had the coldest winter for 50 years (according to TV news in the UK) or that Scotland had the coldest Easter for 46 years, or that the UK sea level is only rising 3.1mm a year, then people do tend to get very sceptical about the cosy consensus of envrionmentalists, most of the media and virtually all politicians that global warming is caused by mankind and heading for a catastrophe. -- You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message, you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||