Neither science nor propaganda holds me enthralled. I find both equally interesting for entirely different reasons. I see a lot of both here in this category of Y/A and there seems to be a lot of difficulty among certain people here in distinguishing which is which.
It was The Winter of Our Discontent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Winter...
The day after tomorrow?
No.
@Pegminer.... "If we see "smoke" coming from stacks, it is certainly NOT water vapor."
Really? From a cooling stack I would say it most certainly IS water vapour (that's how it's spelled in real English).
In the picture http://regentsearth.com/Products/smokest... I'm pretty sure those are cooling towers and not chimneys.
There would be some particulate matter coming out of cooling towers but it would certainly NOT be emmiting CO2.
http://www.rsc.org/AboutUs/News/PressRel...
I think OM's point was that it's a bit misleading taking pictures of cooling towers and using it for an article about pollution and Climate Change. To be fair to alarmists, whether we can see CO2 coming out of the chimney or not, CO2 is still coming out of the chimney.
Oh, and the Day After Tomorrow is an accurate representations of what could happen due to AGW. They all laughed at me for building an underground bunker to protect myself from the flash freezing but who will be laughing when it happens?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_lM6ADTK51GM/Smz5LPLwzvI/AAAAAAAAAo0/rmkl47nd0Zo/s400/Sebring_Bomb_Shelter_1.JPG
Climate scientists are into promoting science fiction. Where do you think Hollywood gets their ideas? There are many "good" explanations of what happens with our climate that seem normal, yet the IP CC is the driving force perpetuating the propaganda that human emitted GHG is the problem and is causing the planet to warm much more than normal. It is the job of the IP CC to prove humans are causing changes in our climate.
---------------------------------------...
Here's something along the lines of what you are talking about : http://www.zero-carbon-or-climate-catast...
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment...
There is an effort to control people through a socialist agenda. This has been the goal of the UN for many years and is clearly the agenda of Pichauri (head of the IP CC). If they can show that human emitted GHGs have "any" effect on the planet's atmosphere, then they will show as many catastrophes as they can think of that can "possibly" be related. Hence, propagandist movies like "The Day After Tomorrow".
Jungle Jim: Harvey is not about asking actual questions or wanting actual answer like most deniers hes about playing up fictional conspiracies, it's about using words like "propaganda" as punctuation if their not playing that game they playing the "it's a religion game", you will see similar trends with many of the lead deniers and similar words repeat. One minute they will claim 0.74c is nothing but then in the very next question they will reference as important the Maunder Minimum which was a drop of about the same.
Here again this denier try's to reference a movie (a favorite with deniers) one that has little to do with reality and certainly one that no scientist has ever claimed is going to happen. At multiple points the movie simply through the physics laws out the window, but I guess deniers are fooled by such nonsense.
But I guess when deniers are references movies like TDAT or the Core or 2012, it's not that hard to see why their understanding of science is so flawed.
It's not that long ago that denier did their usual run of "why are warmists blaming heat wave on AGW, that's weather" when most of us don't in fact do that, and now here's a denier trying to use weather to 'yet again' claim we are cooling (as they seem to tried to do each winter for the last 3-4 years.
It's comical really.
He talks of propaganda yet uses the date range 1906-2005, an admission 2005 is a warm year, but oddly trying to ignore that the same agency that had 2005 as warmest year also has 2010 as tied, but I guess that doesn't play to the "Day After Tomorrow" fantasy
As far as I can see use of real science scares these guys and usually launches abuse, thumbs down.
Harvey states "This whole question is about propaganda" take out the "about" and you have a more factual statement.
As for cooling, (if that is the question) last year 2012 in late Northern Hemisphere Winter, February came in as the 22nd warmest Feb on record and the year as a whole came in as 10th warmest.
This year 2013 Feb came in as 9th warmest, it was much the same for Jan (2012 - 19th) (2013 - 9th) does that sound like any sort of cooling.
I hope nots cuz I gots my brackets loaded up now. Picked FGCU on a whim cuz we go to Ft Myers a lot. Go Bucks!
If it is "THE Day After" its gonna suck if it’s cancelled and we’re being forced to migrate to Mehico! But maybe we'll go on to Zihuatanejo. I hope the water's as blue as it is in my dreams. I hope I see Andy, so I can shake his hand. I hope. Oop sorry another fantasy.
Peggy, what's up with that "invisible" steam (water) thing? I picked you as being a tad more astute than that!
Ah yes, propaganda vs reality.
Propaganda: "Polar bears now need to swim for 9 days to find a seal for food"
Climate scientists are into promoting science fiction. Where do you think Hollywood gets their ideas? There are many "good" explanations of what happens with our climate that seem normal, yet the IP CC is the driving force perpetuating the propaganda that human emitted GHG is the problem and is causing the planet to warm much more than normal. It is the job of the IP CC to prove humans are causing changes in our climate.
---------------------------------------...
Here's something along the lines of what you are talking about : http://www.zero-carbon-or-climate-catast...
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment...
There is an effort to control people through a socialist agenda. This has been the goal of the UN for many years and is clearly the agenda of Pichauri (head of the IP CC). If they can show that human emitted GHGs have "any" effect on the planet's atmosphere, then they will show as many catastrophes as they can think of that can "possibly" be related. Hence, propagandist movies like "The Day After Tomorrow".
Jungle Jim: Harvey is not about asking actual questions or wanting actual answer like most deniers hes about playing up fictional conspiracies, it's about using words like "propaganda" as punctuation if their not playing that game they playing the "it's a religion game", you will see similar trends with many of the lead deniers and similar words repeat. One minute they will claim 0.74c is nothing but then in the very next question they will reference as important the Maunder Minimum which was a drop of about the same.
Here again this denier try's to reference a movie (a favorite with deniers) one that has little to do with reality and certainly one that no scientist has ever claimed is going to happen. At multiple points the movie simply through the physics laws out the window, but I guess deniers are fooled by such nonsense.
But I guess when deniers are references movies like TDAT or the Core or 2012, it's not that hard to see why their understanding of science is so flawed.
It's not that long ago that denier did their usual run of "why are warmists blaming heat wave on AGW, that's weather" when most of us don't in fact do that, and now here's a denier trying to use weather to 'yet again' claim we are cooling (as they seem to tried to do each winter for the last 3-4 years.
It's comical really.
He talks of propaganda yet uses the date range 1906-2005, an admission 2005 is a warm year, but oddly trying to ignore that the same agency that had 2005 as warmest year also has 2010 as tied, but I guess that doesn't play to the "Day After Tomorrow" fantasy
As far as I can see use of real science scares these guys and usually launches abuse, thumbs down.
Harvey states "This whole question is about propaganda" take out the "about" and you have a more factual statement.
As for cooling, (if that is the question) last year 2012 in late Northern Hemisphere Winter, February came in as the 22nd warmest Feb on record and the year as a whole came in as 10th warmest.
This year 2013 Feb came in as 9th warmest, it was much the same for Jan (2012 - 19th) (2013 - 9th) does that sound like any sort of cooling.
I hope nots cuz I gots my brackets loaded up now. Picked FGCU on a whim cuz we go to Ft Myers a lot. Go Bucks!
If it is "THE Day After" its gonna suck if it’s cancelled and we’re being forced to migrate to Mehico! But maybe we'll go on to Zihuatanejo. I hope the water's as blue as it is in my dreams. I hope I see Andy, so I can shake his hand. I hope. Oop sorry another fantasy.
Peggy, what's up with that "invisible" steam (water) thing? I picked you as being a tad more astute than that!
Ah yes, propaganda vs reality.
Propaganda: "Polar bears now need to swim for 9 days to find a seal for food"
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7r_qGGYZb00/TeEhQpPpXyI/AAAAAAAAAAw/IEhlqN1vKuc/s1600/polarbear.jpg
Actually, let me check my calendar again, yep, it is the day after yesterday.
It is pretty sickening when these bozos equate anything and everything with our emissions of CO2 and pretend to have science on their side. It would be funny if they weren't serious.
I think Mike is right that most of the emissions are steam and water vapor became visible when it condensed as a small particles of water.
You said
"Does anyone else find it disingenuous that the arctic cold mass hurricane Sandy mixed with has been dismissed?"
What does this even mean? Disingenuous of whom? And who is dismissing it? You? Other people with little interest in meteorology? I certainly don't know of any meteorologists/climate scientists that have dismissed it.
Ottawa Mike said:
"Propaganda: "CO2 pollution spews from coal powered energy stations"
...
Reality: CO2 is a colorless gas. The "smoke" that you see in such photos is mostly water vapor."
It's very nice of Mike to give us science lessons that also illustrate what is propaganda and what is reality. Unfortunately, his "reality" is fiction. Alas, water vapor is also a colorless, invisible gas. If we see "smoke" coming from stacks, it is certainly NOT water vapor. Try reading more science books before giving science lessons.
EDIT for Ottawa Mike: I don't understand why you're giving more examples of what you think is misleading instead of admitting that your "reality" was incorrect. Can't you just admit you're wrong?
Carbon dioxide is invisible, Water vapor is invisible. You do not see EITHER of them. The visible plume that you see is a mixture of liquid water droplets and any particulates that may be emitted. It's true that you can't tell whether CO2 is being emitted by looking at the stack (without sophisticated instruments), but if we're looking at the stacks on a fossil fuel power plant, it's certain that CO2 IS being emitted, so claiming that just because you can't see it in the plume does not mean it isn't present in the plume--it is. It is being carried along with the also invisible water vapor, the particulates, and the water droplets that are condensing out.
ONE MORE THOUGHT on Ottawa Mike's answer: It is more than a little ironic that when railing against what he considers "propaganda," his "science" link is to a web page that is an advertisement for a company--and one that gets the science wrong to boot!
A SCIENCE LESSON for Mike, Ian, Keef, etc.: Water vapor is invisible. Don't believe me? Aren't you always telling us how important water vapor is as a greenhouse gas? It's literally EVERYWHERE in the atmosphere...and yet you see right through it. When you sit on your couch, watching Fox News, you're looking right through a whole bunch of water vapor. When you look up at the sun, or sit in the bleachers and watch a game, you're looking right through water vapor...it doesn't block your view, does it? So why do you think that's what you see coming out of those stacks, be they from coal-fired power plants or cooling towers? When you see a cloud in the sky, what are you seeing then? Here's another clue--it's not water vapor. Most of what you see is either liquid water or solid water (ice). To convince you, I'll give a link to a plot from the deniers favorite website:
Actually, let me check my calendar again, yep, it is the day after yesterday.
It is pretty sickening when these bozos equate anything and everything with our emissions of CO2 and pretend to have science on their side. It would be funny if they weren't serious.
I think Mike is right that most of the emissions are steam and water vapor became visible when it condensed as a small particles of water.
You said
"Does anyone else find it disingenuous that the arctic cold mass hurricane Sandy mixed with has been dismissed?"
What does this even mean? Disingenuous of whom? And who is dismissing it? You? Other people with little interest in meteorology? I certainly don't know of any meteorologists/climate scientists that have dismissed it.
Ottawa Mike said:
"Propaganda: "CO2 pollution spews from coal powered energy stations"
...
Reality: CO2 is a colorless gas. The "smoke" that you see in such photos is mostly water vapor."
It's very nice of Mike to give us science lessons that also illustrate what is propaganda and what is reality. Unfortunately, his "reality" is fiction. Alas, water vapor is also a colorless, invisible gas. If we see "smoke" coming from stacks, it is certainly NOT water vapor. Try reading more science books before giving science lessons.
EDIT for Ottawa Mike: I don't understand why you're giving more examples of what you think is misleading instead of admitting that your "reality" was incorrect. Can't you just admit you're wrong?
Carbon dioxide is invisible, Water vapor is invisible. You do not see EITHER of them. The visible plume that you see is a mixture of liquid water droplets and any particulates that may be emitted. It's true that you can't tell whether CO2 is being emitted by looking at the stack (without sophisticated instruments), but if we're looking at the stacks on a fossil fuel power plant, it's certain that CO2 IS being emitted, so claiming that just because you can't see it in the plume does not mean it isn't present in the plume--it is. It is being carried along with the also invisible water vapor, the particulates, and the water droplets that are condensing out.
ONE MORE THOUGHT on Ottawa Mike's answer: It is more than a little ironic that when railing against what he considers "propaganda," his "science" link is to a web page that is an advertisement for a company--and one that gets the science wrong to boot!
A SCIENCE LESSON for Mike, Ian, Keef, etc.: Water vapor is invisible. Don't believe me? Aren't you always telling us how important water vapor is as a greenhouse gas? It's literally EVERYWHERE in the atmosphere...and yet you see right through it. When you sit on your couch, watching Fox News, you're looking right through a whole bunch of water vapor. When you look up at the sun, or sit in the bleachers and watch a game, you're looking right through water vapor...it doesn't block your view, does it? So why do you think that's what you see coming out of those stacks, be they from coal-fired power plants or cooling towers? When you see a cloud in the sky, what are you seeing then? Here's another clue--it's not water vapor. Most of what you see is either liquid water or solid water (ice). To convince you, I'll give a link to a plot from the deniers favorite website:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/atmospheric_spectral_absorption.png
Ah Pegminder your full of sh1t, water vapor is invisible, have you ever looked at a boiling kettle
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/9952899/Winter-refuses-to-let-go-across-the-Northern-Hemisphere.html#?frame=2519457
Just a brief slide show of the late winter weather across the Northern hemisphere.
Does anyone else find it disingenuous that the arctic cold mass hurricane Sandy mixed with has been dismissed? For the more sensational "superstorm Sandy?"
There is science, and their is propaganda. Which one holds you enthralled?
彼は、クラーケンの水中を移動せずに戦ったモンスターを止めて、彼はケルベロスを飼い...
So WTF is your point?
I wouldnt describe your scenario as "disengenuous" - more like your premise is BS
Ah Pegminder your full of sh1t, water vapor is invisible, have you ever looked at a boiling kettle
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/9952899/Winter-refuses-to-let-go-across-the-Northern-Hemisphere.html#?frame=2519457
Just a brief slide show of the late winter weather across the Northern hemisphere.
Does anyone else find it disingenuous that the arctic cold mass hurricane Sandy mixed with has been dismissed? For the more sensational "superstorm Sandy?"
There is science, and their is propaganda. Which one holds you enthralled?
彼は、クラーケンの水中を移動せずに戦ったモンスターを止めて、彼はケルベロスを飼い...
So WTF is your point?
I wouldnt describe your scenario as "disengenuous" - more like your premise is BS
