Comments on: No Warming in Antarctica http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2007/09/no-warming-in-a.html Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:51:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: Randall DeWitt http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2007/09/no-warming-in-a.html/comment-page-1#comment-46 Randall DeWitt Sat, 06 Oct 2007 08:35:46 +0000 http://climate-movie.com/wordpress/2007/09/no-warming-in-a.html#comment-46 <p>Though humanities CO2 contribution is a serious problem, it is less than a 20 percent contributing thermal factor related to the earths rapid melting ice. The major thermal contributor to this phenomena within the aquatic structure, is actually the reversing of the natural direction of conduction within these colder regions being generated by the oceans DOW, or much colder ’deep ocean waters.’ having accumulated a high percentage of humanities low level thermal energy that it has unknowingly presented directly to the DOW for over the past two centuries, at an increasing rate. It is that accumulation that is spilling over into these colder regions and being vented upwards through the colder surface waters there. This is an unnatural event that would not be taking place if humanities massive low level thermal contribution hadn’t been allowed to accumulate there. This reversal of the natural “downwards” direction of conduction , to an “upwards” direction of conduction increases the rate at which ice melts by as much as 95%, all by itself, without even having to generate a detectable temperature rise. <br /> Our extensive research and controlled experimentation supports these findings. Please do not discount this information, because simply addressing the CO2 contribution alone will not save our planets ice shelves, glaciers, and snow packs from this thermal invasion. Returning the oceans DOW to it’s nature integrity is in fact what needs to take place to stop the accelerated rate at which the earths ice is melting off. <br /> We all need to better understand just how fragile and restrictive the aquatic environment actually is in respect to humanities unnatural and massive low level thermal contribution. Simply learning that 75% of the entire outer surface area of the aquatic environment is actually in direct contact with the much warmer planet surface, which is a little talked about major thermal contributor to the aquatic environment. This leaves only the remaining 25% upper surface area for releasing the excess thermal energy needed to keep that healthy balance that was present for millions of years prior to humanities contribution recklessly being feed into the mix. Out of the remaining 25% of the upper surface area, we know that at least two thirds of it is also taking in more thermal energy than it is releasing, from the solar contribution. This fact exposes a very limited potential to vent excess thermal energy. Problem is, humanities contribution is greatly dispersed to levels below that of the oceans thermo cline, thus presenting it to the conductive powers of the DOW, which took the majority of it in. <br /> Some people have recklessly stated that a large pacific volcanic event would provide the more thermal energy into the environment than humanity has. This might be true of the atmosphere, but certainly is not true of the aquatic environment. As we know, heat rises, thus the majority of the thermal energy presented by such an event would rise very quickly up to the surface of the ocean where it would spread out and be vented off into the atmosphere. Humanities contribution, though massive, is presented world wide at such a very low thermal level that most of it has ended up in the oceans DOW. I would imagine, at a volume of hundreds if not thousands of times that which could be contributed by such a localized volcanic event. Please think about this reality. <br /> Thank you! Randall DeWitt</p> <p>PS' this reversal of the direction of conduction can start the ice to melting rapidly without any thermal increase in temperature.</p> Though humanities CO2 contribution is a serious problem, it is less than a 20 percent contributing thermal factor related to the earths rapid melting ice. The major thermal contributor to this phenomena within the aquatic structure, is actually the reversing of the natural direction of conduction within these colder regions being generated by the oceans DOW, or much colder ’deep ocean waters.’ having accumulated a high percentage of humanities low level thermal energy that it has unknowingly presented directly to the DOW for over the past two centuries, at an increasing rate. It is that accumulation that is spilling over into these colder regions and being vented upwards through the colder surface waters there. This is an unnatural event that would not be taking place if humanities massive low level thermal contribution hadn’t been allowed to accumulate there. This reversal of the natural “downwards” direction of conduction , to an “upwards” direction of conduction increases the rate at which ice melts by as much as 95%, all by itself, without even having to generate a detectable temperature rise.
Our extensive research and controlled experimentation supports these findings. Please do not discount this information, because simply addressing the CO2 contribution alone will not save our planets ice shelves, glaciers, and snow packs from this thermal invasion. Returning the oceans DOW to it’s nature integrity is in fact what needs to take place to stop the accelerated rate at which the earths ice is melting off.
We all need to better understand just how fragile and restrictive the aquatic environment actually is in respect to humanities unnatural and massive low level thermal contribution. Simply learning that 75% of the entire outer surface area of the aquatic environment is actually in direct contact with the much warmer planet surface, which is a little talked about major thermal contributor to the aquatic environment. This leaves only the remaining 25% upper surface area for releasing the excess thermal energy needed to keep that healthy balance that was present for millions of years prior to humanities contribution recklessly being feed into the mix. Out of the remaining 25% of the upper surface area, we know that at least two thirds of it is also taking in more thermal energy than it is releasing, from the solar contribution. This fact exposes a very limited potential to vent excess thermal energy. Problem is, humanities contribution is greatly dispersed to levels below that of the oceans thermo cline, thus presenting it to the conductive powers of the DOW, which took the majority of it in.
Some people have recklessly stated that a large pacific volcanic event would provide the more thermal energy into the environment than humanity has. This might be true of the atmosphere, but certainly is not true of the aquatic environment. As we know, heat rises, thus the majority of the thermal energy presented by such an event would rise very quickly up to the surface of the ocean where it would spread out and be vented off into the atmosphere. Humanities contribution, though massive, is presented world wide at such a very low thermal level that most of it has ended up in the oceans DOW. I would imagine, at a volume of hundreds if not thousands of times that which could be contributed by such a localized volcanic event. Please think about this reality.
Thank you! Randall DeWitt

PS’ this reversal of the direction of conduction can start the ice to melting rapidly without any thermal increase in temperature.

]]> By: Skewed? http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2007/09/no-warming-in-a.html/comment-page-1#comment-45 Skewed? Fri, 21 Sep 2007 21:50:59 +0000 http://climate-movie.com/wordpress/2007/09/no-warming-in-a.html#comment-45 <p>By "this guy", I mean the guy from the daily green.</p> <p>Is he skewing the data or what?</p> By “this guy”, I mean the guy from the daily green.

Is he skewing the data or what?

]]> By: Skewed? http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2007/09/no-warming-in-a.html/comment-page-1#comment-44 Skewed? Fri, 21 Sep 2007 21:49:45 +0000 http://climate-movie.com/wordpress/2007/09/no-warming-in-a.html#comment-44 <p>What's this guy talking about?</p> <p>http://www.thedailygreen.com/2007/09/21/arctic-isnt-only-pole-melting-fast/7016/</p> What’s this guy talking about?

http://www.thedailygreen.com/2007/09/21/arctic-isnt-only-pole-melting-fast/7016/

]]>