bob_bonner

But a woman can't judge her own density

But a man can.

This article alleges that we need more pollution to counter the greenhouse effect...? That's a joke, right? Either way, I don't buy it. This planet was around a long time before man and these alleged 'protective' man-made pollutants. The solution is to reduce the cause, not cloak the planet in pollution.

The article doesn't allege that, nor am I advocating polluting the air. However the fact that we have cleaner air now than we did in the '80s is partly accountable for the recent increase in global warming.

Having cleaner air now than in the '80's *may* be partly accountable for the recent increase in global warming. From what I got out of that article more studies need to be done to confirm that *theory*. Either way, I think it's pointless because it's obvious the solution isn't to go back to polluting the air. The solution is to reduce the cause of global warming which is already known but not being acted upon.

Eh? First you poo-poo my claim and ask me to provide a reference to a reputable scientific journal. I do that, and then you turn around and say "hey, it's only a *theory*". Guess what? Everything is a theory. That global warming is man-made is also a theory. The only irrefutable "fact" is global warming itself.

This article alleges that we need more pollution to counter the greenhouse effect...? That's a joke, right? Either way, I don't buy it. This planet was around a long time before man and these alleged 'protective' man-made pollutants. The solution is to reduce the cause, not cloak the planet in pollution.

The article doesn't allege that, nor am I advocating polluting the air. However the fact that we have cleaner air now than we did in the '80s is partly accountable for the recent increase in global warming.

Reference any reputible scientific journal that supports your statements otherwise, this will just turn into a pi$$ing contest.

The effect I described is called "solar dimming" and is common knowledge among environmental scientists.

For some recent research findings, see

Wild, M., Ohmura A., Makowski, K. [2007]

Impact of surface solar dimming and brightening on global warming

Geophys. Res. Lett., (in press)

Martin Wild is affiliated with the Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science (IACETH) in Zurich and has written a number of articles on the subject.

For a layman's introduction to the subject, follow this link.

Masks the greenhouse effect. Prevents global warming.

The greenhouse effect is the absorption of energy by the atmosphere which is only partly responsible for making the planet warmer.

Of course, the real cause of global warming is the sun. To maintain a thermal equilibrium, the earth must radiate the same amount of energy back into space that it receives from the sun. There are basically two types of radiation, visible solar radiation and thermal infrared radiation. The former heats up the surface and the latter heats up the atmosphere. Air pollution reduces the amount of solar radiation reaching the surface.

Pollution actually helps prevent global warming. If the atmosphere was clear of pollution, the earth

would heat up much faster. Fewer particles in the air to absorb the sunlight means more solar energy

hitting the ground.

That would be what you'd think with a rudimentary knowledge of the science. Luckily many people have a better understanding of the science than that.

It's a scientific fact. Ask any scientist. The greenhouse effect is partly masked by air pollution.

Pollution actually helps prevent global warming. If the atmosphere was clear of pollution, the earth would heat up much faster. Fewer particles in the air to absorb the sunlight means more solar energy hitting the ground.

It is possible. There are several blacklisted IP's. I will check yours later .

Still doesn't work for me:

Your IP is: 68.237.40.206 Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

She wants Rummy terminated? That's a bit harsh, don't you think?

maybe because you haven't been here in a veeeeeeeeeeeeeeery long time! *shrugs* (or made a post in the year 2006) ...

Be that as it may, I can log in from work just fine. It's my home IP that's blacklisted, not my ID, you see.

Am getting this:

Should you really be here? Your information has been logged.

Your IP is: 68.237.32.23

Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

and then again later

Should you really be here? Your information has been logged.

Your IP is: 68.237.62.151

Browser: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

Why shouldn't I be here?

Is my ISP blacklisted somehow?