Researcher: Basic Greenhouse Equations "Totally Wrong"

mkpdavies · 07-03-2008, 08:03 PM

DailyTech - Researcher: Basic Greenhouse Equations "Totally Wrong"

Quote:

New derivation of equations governing the greenhouse effect reveals "runaway warming" impossible

Miklós Zágoni isn't just a physicist and environmental researcher. He is also a global warming activist and Hungary's most outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol. Or was. That was until he learned the details of a new theory of the greenhouse effect, one that not only gave far more accurate climate predictions here on Earth, but Mars too. The theory was developed by another Hungarian scientist, Ferenc Miskolczi, an atmospheric physicist with 30 years of experience and a former researcher with NASA's Ames Research Center.
After studying it, Zágoni stopped calling global warming a crisis, and has instead focused on presenting the new theory to other climatologists. The data fit extremely well. "I fell in love," he stated at the International Climate Change Conference this week.
"Runaway greenhouse theories contradict energy balance equations," Miskolczi states. Just as the theory of relativity sets an upper limit on velocity, his theory sets an upper limit on the greenhouse effect, a limit which prevents it from warming the Earth more than a certain amount.
How did modern researchers make such a mistake? They relied upon equations derived over 80 years ago, equations which left off one term from the final solution.

At fargin last. Once a few people recognise a cult when they see one, they can then wake other members up.

Clippo · 08-03-2008, 08:59 AM

A). Be careful about what you read in the newspapers - especially the DailyTech. (is it a 'red-top btw?)

B) This guy must have been on of the '19' in :- The New York Times > Log In

C) In the said DailyTech article, it uses as support for this guy a ‘paper’ written last year by Stephen Schwartz which has comprehensively been debunked in CC scientific circles.

D) I could go on……. but

Smackdown again methinks

mkpdavies · 08-03-2008, 09:04 AM

Good to see you have absolutely no argument against the person, but choose to shoot the messanger again.

You remind me of Milleband.

Akria · 09-03-2008, 10:32 AM

It would be nice if they would define the terms of the equations.

gimlet · 09-03-2008, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

Good to see you have absolutely no argument against the person, but choose to shoot the messanger again.

You remind me of Milleband.

And it's even peer reviewed!

Hartlepool · 09-03-2008, 01:45 PM

Well done mkpd,clitto is sunk again.

Clippo · 09-03-2008, 05:06 PM

Gimlet wrote:-

Quote:

And it's even peer reviewed!

You show your ignorance of the scientific publishing process.

Different scientific journals have widely differing standards for publishing scientific papers. It may indeed be that this journal he published in has a strict peer-review process - or it may not.
If it was such a seminal piece of work - as claimed by sceptics to bring down the whole AGW 'conspiracy', why didn't he (they) publish it in one of the premiere Climate science journals?

And have you ever bothered to look to see if there are any follow up scientific papers - either agreeing or disagreeing?

I suspect not so therefore it was a fatuous remark.

mkpdavies · 09-03-2008, 05:07 PM

You show what a fraud and fake you are. You wouldn't know science if it bit you on the ****.

Akria · 09-03-2008, 08:57 PM

You're having fun with your continual insults directed at Clippo, aren't you?

Besoeker · 09-03-2008, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akria

You're having fun with your continual insults directed at Clippo, aren't you?

Probably a wasted post......
You, I and others are on his ignore list. Perhaps you could see that as flattery - maybe he can't deal with rational comments that oppose his own.
There again, perhaps not. I'm sure you and I understand his intent.

08-03-2008, 09:04 AM	#3 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	Good to see you have absolutely no argument against the person, but choose to shoot the messanger again. You remind me of Milleband. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

09-03-2008, 10:32 AM	#4 (permalink)
Akria Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Grimsby, NELincs Posts: 2,454 Party: None	It would be nice if they would define the terms of the equations. __________________ I am getting very tired of people not reading my posts properly. Please do not reply to me unless you are sure you have not missed out the key points I am making and key words I am using. http://real-democracy.co.uk \| Admin and proud The commonality of mankind: If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?

09-03-2008, 05:07 PM	#8 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	You show what a fraud and fake you are. You wouldn't know science if it bit you on the ****. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

09-03-2008, 08:57 PM	#9 (permalink)
Akria Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Grimsby, NELincs Posts: 2,454 Party: None	You're having fun with your continual insults directed at Clippo, aren't you? __________________ I am getting very tired of people not reading my posts properly. Please do not reply to me unless you are sure you have not missed out the key points I am making and key words I am using. http://real-democracy.co.uk \| Admin and proud The commonality of mankind: If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-03-2008, 08:59 AM	#2 (permalink)
Clippo Uber Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Cheshire Posts: 2,089	A). Be careful about what you read in the newspapers - especially the DailyTech. (is it a 'red-top btw?) B) This guy must have been on of the '19' in :- The New York Times > Log In C) In the said DailyTech article, it uses as support for this guy a ‘paper’ written last year by Stephen Schwartz which has comprehensively been debunked in CC scientific circles. D) I could go on……. but Smackdown again methinks

09-03-2008, 01:45 PM	#6 (permalink)
Hartlepool Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: North East England Posts: 6,643 Party: Other	Well done mkpd,clitto is sunk again.