Miguel Rakiewicz writes in Tips and Notes:
Spiegel.com has today published the English translation of its interview of “The Cold Sun” author, Fritz Vahrenholt.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,813814,00.html
Not only is Vahrenholt a prominent Social Democrat and former German Environment Minister, but also outgoing CEO of the renewable energy group RWE Innogy.
It’s an extensive interview, touching upon the various climate-influencing factors left out by the IPCC in its promotion of CO2 as the apocalyptic threat to mankind, and the massive government intervention and expense to supposedly make it go away.
“The Cold Sun” author explains the reason of his current point of view as
follows:
Vahrenholt:
For years, I disseminated the hypotheses of the IPCC, and I feel duped. Renewable energy is near and dear to me, and I’ve been fighting for its expansion for more than 30 years. My concern is that if citizens discover that the people who warn of a climate disaster are only telling half the truth, they will no longer be prepared to pay higher electricity costs for wind and solar (energy). Then the conversion of our energy supply will lack the necessary acceptance.
SUGGESTION:
How to tell somebody why you don’t believe in AGW.
Science, won the day for scepticism, the scientific method when properly applied won the day. It is the solid foundation that sceptics are able to base their argument upon.
Science can’t be politicised, truth of fact can’t be denied, a syntax of logic will always destroy beliefs that are without truth.
The Science says:
Pressure is the required variable only if one compares Atmosheric Thermal Enhancement across planets. For any individual planet, it is the atmospheric mass that effectively controls thermal enhancement. There is no confusion with the pressure-controlled lapse rate with the atmosphere of a given planet.
Why Now? It’s the science;
• The climate of Earths’ atmosphere results from a formation of a climate machine by combining solar isolation and force of pressure. Coupled with spatio-temporal chaotic systems of irradiation and radiation of surface and atmosphere, dynamic heat distributions of oceans, a multiple pole thermodynamic atmosphere, with a gravitational velocity and planetary harmonics, spinning on an uneven axis around a Sun, with fluctuation of solar isolation, immersed in a space that has galactic electromagnetic winds.
• The physical construct of a planet, with or without an atmosphere, retains ancient energy by the force of pressure on its mass. Otherwise planets could not exist.
• Planets attract cold by the density of its mass and distribute heat by the dynamics of mass. Space attracts heat by the sparsest of its mass.
• Heat rises, cool sinks. Atmosphere cannot back radiate heat to a warmer surface than the atmosphere which, cools with height. Thermodynamic gas laws describe the mechanisms of weather in the troposphere.
Ref: General Remarks on the Temperature of the Terrestrial Globe and the Planetary Spaces; by Baron Fourier.
The pressure of the atmosphere and bodies of water, has the general effect to render the distribution of heat more uniform. In the ocean and in the lakes, the coldest particles, or rather those whose density is the greatest, are continually tending downwards, and the motion of heat depending on this cause is much more rapid than that which takes place in solid masses in consequence of their connecting power. The mathematical examination of this effect would require exact and numerous observations. These would enable us to understand how this internal motion prevents the internal heat of the globe from becoming sensible in deep waters.
Where NASA got the science wrong:
Arrhenious in 1897 screwed up about the conservation of energy in gaseous mass , he flipped out about the relationship of carbon to life in a stupid greenhouse.
Dopey Hansen in the early 80’s flipped out about Arrhenious’ mistake and caused all his stupid mates to believe in an invalid scientific principle.
They spent billions in chasing argumentum ad populum. When, if they had followed a correct method of science, by applying scepticism, they would have found the answer that has been there, right under their noses.
Climate is a multidisciplinary field of science, and cannot be treated as a pseudoscience, necessary of propitiation. Science will correct this fatal mistake.
The force of pressure encloses our atmosphere not a greenhouse.
So, when somebody asks why you don’t believe in AGW you can say;
“It’s the science, stupid.”
Ike Eisenhower gave a warning, philosophers expressed it, we fell for it. This time it came in
the cloak of science.
The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is
Rapidly fadin’.
And the first one now
Will later be last
For the times they are a-changin’.
I applaud Fritz Vahrenholt for jettisoning many of his earlier beliefs about climate change and questioning the manmade global warming hypothesis. He will now face stiff opposition as I once did on a much smaller scale.
When I used The Huffington Post’s own figures to point out that the earth’s climate has not been warming since 1998, Arianna Huffington’s website censored me and removed my profile. You can read about my censorship troubles at my website, Xarkonul, which is available at
https://sites.google.com/site/xarkonul/
It may be that Dana at SS has posted and withdrawn and reposted an article on this topic.
It was linked to on another site, along with a comment that it was posted on SS on Feb. 11th.
By the 13th SS had then announced it was in the pipeline…then posted by the 15th.
Someone might want to check how the revision is going so far.