Re: Gobal Warming Hoax! and CO2 a twist

[daleboyce@charter.net]

Radsafers,



How many of you are aware that the CO2 absortion band in the infrared is

essentially saturated when looking at earth from space?  Show of hands? That

is when a spacecraft looks a I.R. radiating from the earth there is

essentially nothing in the wavelength that CO2 absorbs.  The result is a

large change in CO2 has a small change in the heat retained by the earth's

atmosphere.  There is some increase due to the tails in the absorption peak,

but it is far from proportional..Also, it has probably been the case since

the beginning of the industrial revolution.



I am not taking an anti-global warming stance.  There are plenty of

greenhouse gases that can cause an increase in heat retention.  The focus on

CO2 though probably shows that there is a lack of understanding in the

science community in general.



For instance:  there is a push among environmentalists to implement

liquified natural gas as a fuel source for cars because it burns more

cleanly than gasoline.  Methane is a very bad greenhouse gas, and I would

wager that the leakage resulting from its use would outstrip the gains made

by reducing other pollutants. It is also a terrible waste of a resource that

can be used efficiently and safely(relative safety) heating homes and

businesses.  Although, electricity from nuclear power would be safer.



Carbon monoxide is another bad actor.  Although, I believe industry probably

generates far less of it than 50 or maybe even 100 years ago, coal and

diesel power are major generators of it.



Ammonia, propane, butane, WATER! that deadly dihydrogen monoxide the

industrial solvent that kills more people a year in accidents than any other

chemical; are all greenhouse gases. None of these have saturated absorption.

Heat retention is proportional to increased concentration.



It is very frustrating to listen to people argue about CO2 when all of the

greenhouse gases are inter-related at some level.  Reducing one may increase

another that causes even more harm. For example cooling of the combustion of

gasoline in the early seventies to reduce nitrogen oxides did major damage

to fuel economy and greatly increased CO2 production.  It also necessitated

espensive catalytic convertors to cut the increase in carbon monoxide.

Doubling cars prices over just a couple of years.  At a similar time it was

decided that it wasn't economically viable to add seat belts to school

buses!



Politicizing the debate over global warming obfuscates the real, considered

research that needs to be conducted outside the political sphere.



Personally,  I have no idea whether or not mankind is influencing global

warming, or whether the current trend is just part of the natural

temperature variation that is always happening.  I just wish that it was

left to science and not opinion. Opinions, right ones and wrong ones, are

easily formed and hard to change.  When a man-made global warming proponent

generalizes to say that most scientists believe.... Well it shouldn't be a

religion.



That is my opinion.  Good day!



Dale









************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To

unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the

text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,

with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/