IS GLOBAL WARMING REAL ?

There is an idiot born each and every minute!

As Neil has so aptly proven with his mini expiriment, global warming is
caused by garages. Stop building garages, tear down your old garage and
reduce global warming!

Phi Dung Mo



"Niel Humphreys" wrote in
message nk.net...
HERE IS MY PROOF, CO2 HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRAPPING THE HEAT

1.) Close your garage tight, and make sure there is no big hole of air
coming into contact with the air of your garage.

2.) Go out there driving your car for 2-3 hours, bring your car home into
your garage and turn off your ignition, close the garage tight. Measure
the
air temperature quickly. Write it down.

3.) Wait 1/2 hours, come back and measure your garage temperature again.
You will see the heat comes up on your meter. You can even feel the heat
yourself in the air.

So answer me where the heat comes from when CO2 is not present?

---------------------------

This proves that CO2 was not produced in your garage, the heat of your car
dominates the air in your garage. Why? 99% of Gas in the air is OXYGEN &
NITROGEN, they contact the metal frame of your car engine. Their
electrons
got vibrated, this cause a chain of reaction. Their electrons spin much
faster that usual, they bump each other and up they go into the air.

What actually trapping the heat? (Answer: your garage since it's a high
density chemical structure.)

Niel,
Your test is flawed. You're supposed to shut yourself and the car in the
garage, then run the car for 2 - 3 hours. Then your test will have been
prefected, try it out!

Phi Dung Mo

"Niel Humphreys" wrote in
message nk.net...
HERE IS MY PROOF, CO2 HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRAPPING THE HEAT

1.) Close your garage tight, and make sure there is no big hole of air
coming into contact with the air of your garage.

2.) Go out there driving your car for 2-3 hours, bring your car home into
your garage and turn off your ignition, close the garage tight. Measure
the
air temperature quickly. Write it down.

3.) Wait 1/2 hours, come back and measure your garage temperature again.
You will see the heat comes up on your meter. You can even feel the heat
yourself in the air.

So answer me where the heat comes from when CO2 is not present?

---------------------------

This proves that CO2 was not produced in your garage, the heat of your car
dominates the air in your garage. Why? 99% of Gas in the air is OXYGEN &
NITROGEN, they contact the metal frame of your car engine. Their
electrons
got vibrated, this cause a chain of reaction. Their electrons spin much
faster that usual, they bump each other and up they go into the air.

What actually trapping the heat? (Answer: your garage since it's a high
density chemical structure.)

Phi Dung Mo wrote:

There is an idiot born each and every minute!

As Neil has so aptly proven with his mini expiriment, global warming is
caused by garages. Stop building garages, tear down your old garage and
reduce global warming!

Phi Dung Mo





March 13, 2007
From a Rapt Audience, a Call to Cool the Hype
By WILLIAM J. BROAD

Hollywood has a thing for Al Gore and his three-alarm film on global
warming, “An Inconvenient Truth,� which won an Academy Award for best
documentary. So do many environmentalists, who praise him as a visionary,
and many scientists, who laud him for raising public awareness of climate
change.

But part of his scientific audience is uneasy. In talks, articles and blog
entries that have appeared since his film and accompanying book came out
last year, these scientists argue that some of Mr. Gore’s central points
are exaggerated and erroneous. They are alarmed, some say, at what they
call his alarmism.

“I don’t want to pick on Al Gore,� Don J. Easterbrook, an emeritus professor
of geology at Western Washington University, told hundreds of experts at
the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America. “But there are a
lot of inaccuracies in the statements we are seeing, and we have to temper
that with real data.�

Mr. Gore, in an e-mail exchange about the critics, said his work made “the
most important and salient points� about climate change, if not “some
nuances and distinctions� scientists might want. “The degree of scientific
consensus on global warming has never been stronger,� he said, adding, “I
am trying to communicate the essence of it in the lay language that I
understand.�

Although Mr. Gore is not a scientist, he does rely heavily on the authority
of science in “An Inconvenient Truth,� which is why scientists are
sensitive to its details and claims.

Criticisms of Mr. Gore have come not only from conservative groups and
prominent skeptics of catastrophic warming, but also from rank-and-file
scientists like Dr. Easterbook, who told his peers that he had no political
ax to grind. A few see natural variation as more central to global warming
than heat-trapping gases. Many appear to occupy a middle ground in the
climate debate, seeing human activity as a serious threat but challenging
what they call the extremism of both skeptics and zealots.

Kevin Vranes, a climatologist at the Center for Science and Technology
Policy Research at the University of Colorado, said he sensed a growing
backlash against exaggeration. While praising Mr. Gore for “getting the
message out,� Dr. Vranes questioned whether his presentations
were “overselling our certainty about knowing the future.�

Typically, the concern is not over the existence of climate change, or the
idea that the human production of heat-trapping gases is partly or largely
to blame for the globe’s recent warming. The question is whether Mr. Gore
has gone beyond the scientific evidence.

“He’s a very polarizing figure in the science community,� said Roger A.
Pielke Jr., an environmental scientist who is a colleague of Dr. Vranes at
the University of Colorado center. “Very quickly, these discussions turn
from the issue to the person, and become a referendum on Mr. Gore.�

“An Inconvenient Truth,� directed by Davis Guggenheim, was released last May
and took in more than $46 million, making it one of the top-grossing
documentaries ever. The companion book by Mr. Gore quickly became a best
seller, reaching No. 1 on the New York Times list.

Mr. Gore depicted a future in which temperatures soar, ice sheets melt, seas
rise, hurricanes batter the coasts and people die en masse. “Unless we act
boldly,� he wrote, “our world will undergo a string of terrible
catastrophes.�

He clearly has supporters among leading scientists, who commend his
popularizations and call his science basically sound. In December, he spoke
in San Francisco to the American Geophysical Union and got a reception fit
for a rock star from thousands of attendees.

“He has credibility in this community,� said Tim Killeen, the group’s
president and director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, a
top group studying climate change. “There’s no question he’s read a lot and
is able to respond in a very effective way.�

Some backers concede minor inaccuracies but see them as reasonable for a
politician. James E. Hansen, an environmental scientist, director of NASA’s
Goddard Institute for Space Studies and a top adviser to Mr. Gore,
said, “Al does an exceptionally good job of seeing the forest for the
trees,� adding that Mr. Gore often did so “better than scientists.�

Still, Dr. Hansen said, the former vice president’s work may
hold “imperfections� and “technical flaws.� He pointed to hurricanes, an
icon for Mr. Gore, who highlights the devastation of Hurricane Katrina and
cites research suggesting that global warming will cause both storm
frequency and deadliness to rise. Yet this past Atlantic season produced
fewer hurricanes than forecasters predicted (five versus nine), and none
that hit the United States.

“We need to be more careful in describing the hurricane story than he is,�
Dr. Hansen said of Mr. Gore. “On the other hand,� Dr. Hansen said, “he has
the bottom line right: most storms, at least those driven by the latent
heat of vaporization, will tend to be stronger, or have the potential to be
stronger, in a warmer climate.�

In his e-mail message, Mr. Gore defended his work as fundamentally
accurate. “Of course,� he said, “there will always be questions around the
edges of the science, and we have to rely upon the scientific community to
continue to ask and to challenge and to answer those questions.�

He said “not every single adviser� agreed with him on every point, “but we
do agree on the fundamentals� — that warming is real and caused by humans.

Mr. Gore added that he perceived no general backlash among scientists
against his work. “I have received a great deal of positive feedback,� he
said. “I have also received comments about items that should be changed,
and I have updated the book and slideshow to reflect these comments.� He
gave no specifics on which points he had revised.

He said that after 30 years of trying to communicate the dangers of global
warming, “I think that I’m finally getting a little better at it.�

While reviewers tended to praise the book and movie, vocal skeptics of
global warming protested almost immediately. Richard S. Lindzen, a
climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a member of
the National Academy of Sciences, who has long expressed skepticism about
dire climate predictions, accused Mr. Gore in The Wall Street Journal
of “shrill alarmism.�

Some of Mr. Gore’s centrist detractors point to a report last month by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body that
studies global warming. The panel went further than ever before in saying
that humans were the main cause of the globe’s warming since 1950, part of
Mr. Gore’s message that few scientists dispute. But it also portrayed
climate change as a slow-motion process.

It estimated that the world’s seas in this century would rise a maximum of
23 inches — down from earlier estimates. Mr. Gore, citing no particular
time frame, envisions rises of up to 20 feet and depicts parts of New York,
Florida and other heavily populated areas as sinking beneath the waves,
implying, at least visually, that inundation is imminent.

Bjorn Lomborg, a statistician and political scientist in Denmark long
skeptical of catastrophic global warming, said in a syndicated article that
the panel, unlike Mr. Gore, had refrained from scaremongering. “Climate
change is a real and serious problem� that calls for careful analysis and
sound policy, Dr. Lomborg said. “The cacophony of screaming,� he
added, “does not help.�

So too, a report last June by the National Academies seemed to contradict
Mr. Gore’s portrayal of recent temperatures as the highest in the past
millennium. Instead, the report said, current highs appeared unrivaled
since only 1600, the tail end of a temperature rise known as the medieval
warm period.

Roy Spencer, a climatologist at the University of Alabama, Huntsville, said
on a blog that Mr. Gore’s film did “indeed do a pretty good job of
presenting the most dire scenarios.� But the June report, he added,
shows “that all we really know is that we are warmer now than we were
during the last 400 years.�

Other critics have zeroed in on Mr. Gore’s claim that the energy industry
ran a “disinformation campaign� that produced false discord on global
warming. The truth, he said, was that virtually all unbiased scientists
agreed that humans were the main culprits. But Benny J. Peiser, a social
anthropologist in Britain who runs the Cambridge-Conference Network, or
CCNet, an Internet newsletter on climate change and natural disasters,
challenged the claim of scientific consensus with examples of pointed
disagreement.

“Hardly a week goes by,� Dr. Peiser said, “without a new research paper that
questions part or even some basics of climate change theory,� including
some reports that offer alternatives to human activity for global warming.

Geologists have documented age upon age of climate swings, and some charge
Mr. Gore with ignoring such rhythms.

“Nowhere does Mr. Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he
describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our
planet,� Robert M. Carter, a marine geologist at James Cook University in
Australia, said in a September blog. “Nor does he present any evidence that
climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical
pattern of constant change.�

In October, Dr. Easterbrook made similar points at the geological society
meeting in Philadelphia. He hotly disputed Mr. Gore’s claim that “our
civilization has never experienced any environmental shift remotely similar
to this� threatened change.

Nonsense, Dr. Easterbrook told the crowded session. He flashed a slide that
showed temperature trends for the past 15,000 years. It highlighted 10
large swings, including the medieval warm period. These shifts, he said,
were up to “20 times greater than the warming in the past century.�

Getting personal, he mocked Mr. Gore’s assertion that scientists agreed on
global warming except those industry had corrupted. “I’ve never been paid a
nickel by an oil company,� Dr. Easterbrook told the group. “And I’m not a
Republican.�

Biologists, too, have gotten into the act. In January, Paul Reiter, an
active skeptic of global warming’s effects and director of the insects and
infectious diseases unit of the Pasteur Institute in Paris, faulted Mr.
Gore for his portrayal of global warming as spreading malaria.

“For 12 years, my colleagues and I have protested against the
unsubstantiated claims,� Dr. Reiter wrote in The International Herald
Tribune. “We have done the studies and challenged the alarmists, but they
continue to ignore the facts.�

Michael Oppenheimer, a professor of geosciences and international affairs at
Princeton who advised Mr. Gore on the book and movie, said that reasonable
scientists disagreed on the malaria issue and other points that the critics
had raised. In general, he said, Mr. Gore had distinguished himself for
integrity.

“On balance, he did quite well — a credible and entertaining job on a
difficult subject,� Dr. Oppenheimer said. “For that, he deserves a lot of
credit. If you rake him over the coals, you’re going to find people who
disagree. But in terms of the big picture, he got it right.�


















"Niel Humphreys" wrote in
message nk.net...
HERE IS MY PROOF, CO2 HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRAPPING THE HEAT

1.) Close your garage tight, and make sure there is no big hole of air
coming into contact with the air of your garage.

2.) Go out there driving your car for 2-3 hours, bring your car home into
your garage and turn off your ignition, close the garage tight. Measure
the
air temperature quickly. Write it down.

3.) Wait 1/2 hours, come back and measure your garage temperature again.
You will see the heat comes up on your meter. You can even feel the heat
yourself in the air.

So answer me where the heat comes from when CO2 is not present?

---------------------------

This proves that CO2 was not produced in your garage, the heat of your
car
dominates the air in your garage. Why? 99% of Gas in the air is OXYGEN
&
NITROGEN, they contact the metal frame of your car engine. Their
electrons
got vibrated, this cause a chain of reaction. Their electrons spin much
faster that usual, they bump each other and up they go into the air.

What actually trapping the heat? (Answer: your garage since it's a high
density chemical structure.)

The real idiot is the ones who failed to see my simple illustration, I did
it that way since I assume not many would understand Chemistry.

The real idiot is the ones who believe in the scam of CO2 by believing that
0.5% CO2 can trap 99% Oxygen+Nitrogen.

The real idiot is the ones who don't go to the source to CUT OFF The heat
directly by playing the CO2 fantasy theory.

The Green House Effect is as bogus as you are, you ignored the Shelter of
the Green House, that is what trapped the heat NOT THE CO2. So if you
believe in the Green House Effect, why wouldn't you want to believe in a
Garage effect?

I love to face you person to person to prove that you are a super idiot.

FYI - Heat vibrates the outer electrons of Oxygen and Nitrogen, and CO2
cannot trap O & N since CO2 is 200+ times less.


Niel


"Phi Dung Mo" wrote in message
news:HFnJh.14571$zU1.6815@pd7urf1no...
There is an idiot born each and every minute!

As Neil has so aptly proven with his mini expiriment, global warming is
caused by garages. Stop building garages, tear down your old garage and
reduce global warming!

Phi Dung Mo

"Mettas Mother" wrote in message
...
I don't think I will be alive to see that!

"Niel Humphreys" wrote in
message
news

"Mettas Mother" wrote in message
...
Are you really Neil Humphreys or an imposter.?

Actually where did you get the data that 1% of CO2 is causing all the
heating!



Where did you go to school? You are brain-washed by the stupid
scientists.

When you check the CO2 be sure to use multiprobe, so you can see all Gas
at
the same time.



CO2 is around you every second. CO2 is a molecule that comes out of your
nose, CO2 also comes from your car exhaust pipe.

Yes you cannot see CO2 it's so small in amount, you can't even see Oxygen
and Nitrogen even they are 99% present in the air.

Do you believe CO2(0.5%) out of your nose is much more than the air
surround you?

If you believe that, it means you fall into CO2 scam or Green House Effect
scam.

The truth is, Oxygen and Nitrogen are much larger in quantity, they are
heated up in the air because of so many machines running with in high
temperature. Your car for example, the trucks, airplane jet fuel burning,
Nuclear Plants etc..

**** the idiot Canadians, how dumb can they be?


"Phi Dung Mo" wrote in message
news:uJnJh.15092$DN.3752@pd7urf2no...
Niel,
Your test is flawed. You're supposed to shut yourself and the car in
the
garage, then run the car for 2 - 3 hours. Then your test will have been
prefected, try it out!

Phi Dung Mo

"Niel Humphreys" wrote in
message nk.net...
HERE IS MY PROOF, CO2 HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRAPPING THE HEAT

1.) Close your garage tight, and make sure there is no big hole of air
coming into contact with the air of your garage.

2.) Go out there driving your car for 2-3 hours, bring your car home into
your garage and turn off your ignition, close the garage tight. Measure
the
air temperature quickly. Write it down.

3.) Wait 1/2 hours, come back and measure your garage temperature again.
You will see the heat comes up on your meter. You can even feel the heat
yourself in the air.

So answer me where the heat comes from when CO2 is not present?

---------------------------

This proves that CO2 was not produced in your garage, the heat of your
car
dominates the air in your garage. Why? 99% of Gas in the air is OXYGEN
&
NITROGEN, they contact the metal frame of your car engine. Their
electrons
got vibrated, this cause a chain of reaction. Their electrons spin much
faster that usual, they bump each other and up they go into the air.

What actually trapping the heat? (Answer: your garage since it's a high
density chemical structure.)

"Phi Dung Mo" missed the vitalpoint in the argument...
Niel,
Your test is flawed. You're supposed to shut yourself and the car in
the garage, then run the car for 2 - 3 hours. Then your test will have
been prefected, try it out!

Phi Dung Mo


Ohh - the problem with his analysis isn't that - what he's missed is that
the vital factor causing that temperature rise is _the roof_ !!!!

So, let's escape environaental catastrophy and get rid of all roofing right
now!

C'mon folks - you know it makes sense (more sense that 'NH's argument does,
anyway)


"Niel Humphreys" wrote in
message nk.net...
HERE IS MY PROOF, CO2 HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRAPPING THE HEAT

1.) Close your garage tight, and make sure there is no big hole of air
coming into contact with the air of your garage.

2.) Go out there driving your car for 2-3 hours, bring your car home into
your garage and turn off your ignition, close the garage tight. Measure
the
air temperature quickly. Write it down.

3.) Wait 1/2 hours, come back and measure your garage temperature again.
You will see the heat comes up on your meter. You can even feel the heat
yourself in the air.

So answer me where the heat comes from when CO2 is not present?

---------------------------

This proves that CO2 was not produced in your garage, the heat of your
car
dominates the air in your garage. Why? 99% of Gas in the air is OXYGEN
&
NITROGEN, they contact the metal frame of your car engine. Their
electrons
got vibrated, this cause a chain of reaction. Their electrons spin much
faster that usual, they bump each other and up they go into the air.

What actually trapping the heat? (Answer: your garage since it's a high
density chemical structure.)

"Geoff B" wrote in message
...
"Phi Dung Mo" missed the vitalpoint in the argument...
Niel,
Your test is flawed. You're supposed to shut yourself and the car in
the garage, then run the car for 2 - 3 hours. Then your test will have
been prefected, try it out!

Phi Dung Mo


Ohh - the problem with his analysis isn't that - what he's missed is that
the vital factor causing that temperature rise is _the roof_ !!!!

So, let's escape environaental catastrophy and get rid of all roofing
right
now!

C'mon folks - you know it makes sense (more sense that 'NH's argument
does,
anyway)


Why don't you tell your Scientists to show real "Proof" ? Not just word or
"Theory", or simulation.

Because what you're saying is 0.03% of CO2 is Greater than 99% of (N=78% +
O=21%) in the atmosphere.

The real Moron is the one who's incompetent to come up with a Proof of real
life's situation. The green house effect is "Unnatural simulation" of Real
life. Why? Because Scientists pumped CO2 in their Test lab so much more
than it exists in real life. That's where we disagreed.

Well Mr. Smarter than everybody Neil Humphreys,

I noted recently that this stupid git also criticized Americans for
wrecking the English language. English language? Yeah right, an isalnd full
of people who can barely understand each others speach and fully can't
understand complete phrases or terms from one end of their tiny island to
the other. Sometimes from one side of town to the other.

Phi Dung Mo


"Niel Humphreys" wrote in
message thlink.net...

The real idiot is the ones who failed to see my simple illustration, I did
it that way since I assume not many would understand Chemistry.

The real idiot is the ones who believe in the scam of CO2 by believing
that
0.5% CO2 can trap 99% Oxygen+Nitrogen.

The real idiot is the ones who don't go to the source to CUT OFF The heat
directly by playing the CO2 fantasy theory.

The Green House Effect is as bogus as you are, you ignored the Shelter of
the Green House, that is what trapped the heat NOT THE CO2. So if you
believe in the Green House Effect, why wouldn't you want to believe in a
Garage effect?

I love to face you person to person to prove that you are a super idiot.

FYI - Heat vibrates the outer electrons of Oxygen and Nitrogen, and CO2
cannot trap O & N since CO2 is 200+ times less.


Niel


"Phi Dung Mo" wrote in message
news:HFnJh.14571$zU1.6815@pd7urf1no...
There is an idiot born each and every minute!

As Neil has so aptly proven with his mini expiriment, global warming is
caused by garages. Stop building garages, tear down your old garage and
reduce global warming!

Phi Dung Mo

Why don't you spit out your Canadian science expertise?

because you're the one who took my simple illustration literally in the
wrong way.

The next question I have for you is why you have so much prostitutes in your
country?

Niel.


"Phi Dung Mo" wrote in message
news:il1Kh.21463$DN.4832@pd7urf2no...
Well Mr. Smarter than everybody Neil Humphreys,

I noted recently that this stupid git also criticized Americans for
wrecking the English language. English language? Yeah right, an isalnd
full
of people who can barely understand each others speach and fully can't
understand complete phrases or terms from one end of their tiny island to
the other. Sometimes from one side of town to the other.

Phi Dung Mo


"Niel Humphreys" wrote in
message thlink.net...

The real idiot is the ones who failed to see my simple illustration, I
did
it that way since I assume not many would understand Chemistry.

The real idiot is the ones who believe in the scam of CO2 by believing
that
0.5% CO2 can trap 99% Oxygen+Nitrogen.

The real idiot is the ones who don't go to the source to CUT OFF The heat
directly by playing the CO2 fantasy theory.

The Green House Effect is as bogus as you are, you ignored the Shelter of
the Green House, that is what trapped the heat NOT THE CO2. So if you
believe in the Green House Effect, why wouldn't you want to believe in a
Garage effect?

I love to face you person to person to prove that you are a super idiot.

FYI - Heat vibrates the outer electrons of Oxygen and Nitrogen, and CO2
cannot trap O & N since CO2 is 200+ times less.


Niel


"Phi Dung Mo" wrote in message
news:HFnJh.14571$zU1.6815@pd7urf1no...
There is an idiot born each and every minute!

As Neil has so aptly proven with his mini expiriment, global warming is
caused by garages. Stop building garages, tear down your old garage and
reduce global warming!

Phi Dung Mo