Comments on: Private: Fewer aerosols may step up global warming

By: Geoff

Geoff — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:07:48 +0000

What a bunch of fly in the eye stuff is this. Trees cause could be causing more pollution. I have flown in Alaska for over 12 years and in the winter in the northern most part of the state at about FL350 is a red band of pollution that goes from horizon to horizon and moves daily up higher in latitude or lower, it’s right around the Arctic Circle on the latitude. It’s following the Jet stream. You can not pump 100s of tons of pollution into the air everyday and not expect some day to pay the price. It’s not just us, but we produce a lot for our population %. Our atmosphere, that is the air we breath, is only 2 miles thick. You go above 10,000 feet it gets hard to breath, a pilot can only go for 30 minutes with out supplemental oxygen. 15,000, you will pass out in a few hours, 20,000 you have a few minutes, 30,000 a few seconds. So really were not talking thousands of feet into space. Sort like washing in the toilet after the fact. We need clean energy. Alaska has enough known reserves of Natural Gas to run this country for 150 years. Run the vehicles, produce your electricity, heat your homes, the factories, if any are left. The oil companies , which happens to be British Petroleum is the largest “owner” of the pipeline, refuses to allow the State of Alaska to build the line ourselves. Oil would drop to 10 dollars a barrel. There is no oil shortage now. They have slowed down the amount being pumped out of Alaska because their getting it cheaper in Iraq. This aerosol stuff is because China is going to produce cars, a lot of them and the people who make freon and aerosols would just love to supply that to the 1 billion Chinese who will own a car in the next 10 years. But don’t plant trees because that could be messing up the air. Some said this will extend life??? . Air pollution will extend life. Caution , discuss this with medical help before testing YOUR theory. I invite everyone who believes the gases that cars give off are not harmful, to take your favorite can of aerosol, hook a hose up to your cars tail pipe and put the hose in your car in a locked garage and see how long the aerosol keeps you alive. For those who would do this, do not do this with out speaking to at least 2 Doctors consulting you on why you think you would not die.
It’s simple we have 10,000 feet of clean air, once we fill it with enough toxic junk, we will die. The earth will go on and clean it’s self up. We are a virus and mother nature will just take so much. Be smart. This is serious stuff, you can’t eat more then one fish a week in the most remote places of Eastern Canada because of the mercury that comes out of bleaching the paper white, it comes out the stack and lands in the lakes and streams and the land. We are killing ourselves.
Geoffrey

By: Okolona

Okolona — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 16:41:34 +0000

In 1983, Dansgaard & Oeschger were among the first people to examine two ice cores, each approximately one mile long, brought up from the Greenland Ice Sheet. Laborious studies of the cores proved that global warming occurs every 1500 to 2500 years – even during the Ice Ages and interglacial climate swings the 1500-year cycle was superimposed in the core.
The Earth’s elliptical orbit is on a 100,000-year cycle. The axial tilt variation is on a 41,000-year cycle. The “wobble” of the Earth on its axis is on a 23,000-year cycle. But it is the 1,500 year solar-driven cycle that is responsible for our “global warming” – which cannot be prevented. However, history proves that it will bring benefits to man, especially a reduction in famine/hunger, species survival, and a longer worldwide life expectancy.
The “sky is not falling”.

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 12:33:04 +0000

That story sounds quite contradictory to what the scientist have been telling us in the past. And it seems like the GLOBALISTS and the NEW WORLD ORDER have put out this story to gear us up to accept the next story…“We can intentionaly spray aerosols into the lower atmosphere to reduce global warming”...hence…CHEMTRAILS. Which in effect is also a way to reduce global population. No conspiracy theory, it is a proven fact that chemtrails contain virus’s and other very harmful junk that makes people very sick.

By: sam

sam — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:19:59 +0000

i work here at the cape and anyone would laugh most especially bruce to learn that things are not as clear as the media makes it out to be. except of course for mathmaticians. at least their field of study can be verified on paper.bruce is closer to the truth by understanding it could be we are in pusuit of a feathered elephant

By: sam

sam — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:14:36 +0000

thanks to both of you

By: Lindsay Patterson

Lindsay Patterson — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 17:47:54 +0000

Sam, I’m glad to hear that this website has encouraged you to learn more about science. Indeed, this is a very complex issue, and not easily reduced to one problem lessening or heightening the other.

What aerosols in the atmosphere have done is provide us with not only a physical, but also a mental, shield from global warming. According to Mishchenko, the effects of global warming are occurring regardless of aerosols, it’s just that the aerosols have kept us from recognizing it on the surface of the Earth. They’ve given us the luxury of having this debate at this late stage.

By: Benjamin Napier

Benjamin Napier — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 17:20:39 +0000

Several years ago, the learned among us said that all the soot and other particulates in the atmosphere would shade us and kill us. Then, the carbon dioxide from our oil fired economy is going to heat us up (during some of the coldest and snowiest weather in years) and kill us. Now the lack of pollution is going to heighten the effect of the other, more evil, pollution and kill us.

Might it be that there is no truth to any of this? I think that is the case. These so called problems are political and economic, not physical.

By: sam

sam — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 16:33:27 +0000

today i read some of his work and this is actually good science. although i learned that this is even more complex than i could ever imagine. i found there were heavy carbon isotopes light carbon isotopes and their effects were good and bad depending on the study.if anyone cares to truly learn about this topic simply buy used college text books on metorology,the atmosphere, and the best being,an atlas of life on earth .im very pleased that this blog has me looking things up again, and in real books for that matter. what a thought provoking pursuit.

By: sam

sam — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 03:02:24 +0000

scratch that idea i just visited his site. it made me think up a joke. how many nasa engineers scientists and administrators does it take to screw a bolt?….all of them. it also reminds me of a gary larson cartoon where a bunch of scientists are standing around a rocket that looks like its made of cardboard and duct tape and one says lets face it gentelmen were not rocket scientists. before you get mad at the joke nasa people would love it. because they get it.

By: sam

sam — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 02:36:53 +0000

i am confused. i thought the less particles in the atmosphere the more suns energy was reflected back into space resulting in lower temperatures. and that co emissions were actually particals that trappped heat from the sun resulting in a warming of our atmosphere. could mr mishenko clear this up?