Posted by: graemebird | July 5, 2007

Milos PDF Destroys The Watts/Per/Square-Metre Paradigm

This aint no finished thread. I’m just collecting DATA-for-LATER.
Milos pdf refers to this one:

Make no mistake about it. The watts-per-square-metre paradigm is well and truly wrong. But the problem is there doesn’t seem to be a better model out there to take its place.

Its defeated and so therefore the global warming scare ought to be defeated also.



“[Oh dear – this is all a bit one step forward and two steps back. Your statement “And it hasn’t” is wrong. The truth is that the current upper-atmos meaasurements don’t allow is to say. They are *consistent* with the sfc T trend.”


Consistent isn’t good enough. You guys might spend your time fitting a square peg into a round whole to force a false consistency on things. But you wouldn’t need to keep re-asserting stuff without backing things up if you had the evidence.

You are in the business. You ought to have the figures right at your fingertips. How is the data inconsistent with a situation where solar variation is ten times more important then the watts-per-square-metre paradigm would suggest?

How is the data different from what you’d expect if the CO2-warming effect was ten times weaker and ten times slower-acting then what you’d expect?

And how can you test these things out if you are only trying to fit one paradigm???

Now it should be dead obvious that CO2-warming cannot be equated as equivalent to watts-per-square-metre that you get with solar variation.

Its obvious because whereas CO2 starts working from sea-level up directly and only affects the ocean indirectly…….. the sun punches its energy deep in the ocean.

So to boil down the two effects into watts-per-square-metre and then to just assume they are equivalent regardless of source is crazy-talk.

Milos link falsifies this thesis which ought not have gotten legs in the first place. Since by the science-workers own admission the solar variation cannot explain the data. And whats more we’ve seen this before. Everyone who follows this paradigm knows that Milankovitch changes in forcing ought not have been able to send us into a glaciation and pull us out again. But it has done so 20+ times in 3 million years.

Goddard did a study wherein by their own admission when applying this stupid paradigm….. they found that there was no snowball earth. That according to the paradigm (which is not how they worded it) the ice couldn’t have gone as close to the equater as the evidence suggests.

But like true morons they didn’t reject their own paradigm or at least set up alternatives that will predict the results.

Everyone knows that the paradigm will not explain the medieval warming since the variation in solar output is held not to be strong enough. So these guys play that down rather then put up a new paradigm.

My paradigm has no problems explaining the medieval warming period or the little ice age or anything really.

Take the Holocene Maximum. 8000-5000 years ago. The solar experts report 8000 years ago as being when another period where extremely strong solar activity took place. Even stronger then the 20th century.

It was 6000 years ago when the Malinkovitch cycles were at their most optimum for warm conditions. So its very easy to see why you had that extended warmth and why its been on a downhill trend ever since.

But if you think that solar variation “forcing” is on a par with CO2-“forcing” then you can’t explain the data. Hence endless attempts to play down the assumptions of what the specialists thought they knewe before this cult took over.

You should be testing multiple competing paradigms. If you are not doing that you are wasting money.

Posted by: GMB | July 5, 2007 01:30 AM



  1. Graeme

    You should be testing multiple methods of explosive destruction. If you are not doing that you are wasting money.

    Your denial falsifies the truth about your arse which ought not to have ever been unleashed in the first place. Since by your own admission you have failed to shoot your own butt we are going to have to destroy it for you.

  2. hey Graeme
    Paul Norton has dedicated a thread to you. why are you so popular?

  3. Blah blah – look mate the latest Proc Royal Soc A paper blows all this solar nonsense into the weeds. You’re gone mate. Done like a dinner. And don’t blather when you know you’ve been done.

    At various times in paleo history CO2 leads. If you don’t know that you’re twit.

    And CO2 doesn’t provide the watts – it recycles them. You get more solar for your buck.

    Wake up !

  4. No thats all bullshit. You are lying again. The Proc Royal Soc paper DOES NOT FUCKING BLOW ANYTHING OUT OF THE WATER you stupid incompetent fucking lying cunt.

    You are fucking hopeless. You are an incompetent and you should resign forthwith.

    Any fucking taxeater that gets caught supporting this obvious fraud must resign on the basis of manifest incompetence.

    What a useless cunt you are. You work for the RMIT don’t you. Well you are an incompetent.

    Supposing you were right. You are wrong but supposing you are right. You would still be incompetent because its manifestly the case that you haven’t come up with any evidence you pathetic useless cunt.

    Hang yourself. Save the taxpayer some money.

  5. Well lets see you then?

    Lets see you back it up you fucking incompetent!!!!!!!!!!

    We have SO MUCH got to get rid of the dead wood in our public sector.

    And it ought to start with you and your manifest incompetence fella.

    And John Quiggin has shown that he is useless as an analyst as well. And ought never have had a government job. Or any job of any decision-making capacity.

  6. It doesn’t matter what your specialty is. If you are just THIS USELESS. THIS UNABLE TO ANALYSE ANYTHING…… Then you ought to forfeit your job post-haste. You will bring the general level of any department you work in down.

  7. GMB, you being paged at tigerdroppings.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: