| Re: drivers speeding away
nash wrote:
> You take yourself too seriously maybe. spam spam spam I love spam.
> Everything I told this group came true this year if you read or watch the
> news. Plastic, cancer the whole gammit. Your bullying is over.
1) Cry me a river.
2) It's clear you didn't understand my post
3) I'll try to make it simple for you
you wrote:
>>> Did you see the Global Dimming Documentary on Knowledge Network or
>>> anywhere.
>>> Global Dimming is keeping us from being flooded by sea water. It
>>> reflects sunlight and is caused by air pollution.
That reflection is called albedo. This instance of it that you mention
is due to particulate matter, casually called PM by civil/environmental
engineers and scientists, etc. The work of a former professor of mine
(Dr. Mike Bergin at GA Tech) analyzes it's true impact on global
climate. Its anthropogenic source is the combustion of fossil fuels.
Diesel and coal are particularly bad. Volcanoes contribute a amount as
well. As ice caps and snow cover have melted with increasing arctic
temperature, the Earth's albedo has decreased dramatically.
>>> Tested on a 3 day no
>>> flights in N.America ban after 911. The difference was one C. just from
>>> not having contrails from air planes. LA was the example.
Ok. So you're saying that a 3-day sample is definitive proof that the
lack of air traffic in L.A. caused a 1 deg. C increase in temperature.
Was it sea surface temperature? Air temperature at sea level? Either
way, I laugh at that conclusion as being anything more than a "partially
educated shot in the dark." Don't agree with me? Fine. But I've
enough graduate environmental data analysis courses under my belt to
feel pretty confident in my assessment with the given info.
>>> So banning
>>> air pollution is the opposite of what we should be thinking about because
>>> Global Warming would then be unleashed full force.
That statement speaks for itself.
|