Another View on the Promotion of AGW (updated)
10/19/2011 4 Comments
Steven Frisch is on a State Department Funded Exchange visit in Mongolia. He has been posting comments on the Sierra Foothills Report. My comments are in bold [Brackets]
“Yesterday afternoons round table with media was fascinating. First, print is still king here. UB [the Mongolian capital of Ulaanbaatar] has eight newspapers, officially, and another unknown number of street newspapers and hyper local news web sites that are self published, some quite interesting, and critical of the government environmental policies.
“We had a long conversation about the ‘public trust doctrine’, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the California Environmental Quality Act as examples of tools that can be used in the US to ensure public participation in environmental decisions, require agencies to consider cumulative impacts, and create standing for citizens in the judicial system. [ We know how well that worked in California. While the initial purpose of the CEQA was well intended, it has been abused by environmentalist to implement an anti-capitalism agenda. The folks in Mongolia want to be careful when attempting to follow the California model. The left has used environmental regulation to drive California’s economy into the septic tank. If Mongolia follows the CA Model, they can expect to end up in the same tank.]
“The media was well informed about environmental issues and very interested in climate change and how the US is addressing climate change mitigation and adaptation. California is seen as a leader, and is definitely an influencer of policy here. [ I suggest that the folks in Mongolia follow the Czech model, details here.]
“I was struck that in the US we seem to feel that the global environmental crises, exemplified by climate change, can not be seriously addressed because the scale of the problem is so great. Here people seem to be very open to the idea that the crises itself is an opportunity, to leap frog technologies, to leverage resources for mitigation, to capture and internalize external costs of doing business and build them into future costs of products.” [ How can someone seriously address something that is not happening? Oh! ]
Update (10-19-20, 09:15) Maybe Steven Frisch would like to share this with the newspaper folks in Mongolia:
After replicating Al Gores experiment, he are his conclusions:
So, here is what I think is going on with Mr. Gore’s Climate 101 experiment.
- As we know, the Climate101 video used infrared heat lamps
- The glass cookie jars chosen don’t allow the full measure of infrared from the lamps to enter the center of the jar and affect the gas. I showed this two different ways with the infrared camera in videos above.
- During the experiments, I showed the glass jars heating up using the infrared camera. Clearly they were absorbing the infrared energy from the lamps.
- The gases inside the jars, air and pure CO2 thus had to be heated by secondary heat emission from the glass as it was being heated. They were not absorbing infrared from the lamps, but rather heat from contact with the glass.
- Per the engineering table, air is a better conductor of heat than pure CO2, so it warms faster, and when the lamps are turned off, it cools faster.
- The difference value of 2°F shown in the Climate 101 video split screen was never met in any of the experiments I performed.
- The condition stated in the Climate 101 video of “Within minutes you will see the temperature of the bottle with the carbon dioxide in it rising faster and higher.” was not met in any of the experiments I performed. In fact it was exactly the opposite. Air consistently warmed faster than CO2.
- Thus, the experiment as designed by Mr. Gore does not show the greenhouse effect as we know it in our atmosphere, it does show how heat transfer works and differences in heat transfer rates with different substances, but nothing else.
Mr. Gore’s Climate 101 experiment is falsified, and could not work given the equipment he specified. If they actually tried to perform the experiment themselves, perhaps this is why they had to resort to stagecraft in the studio to fake the temperature rise on the split screen thermometers.
The experiment as presented by Al Gore and Bill Nye “the science guy” is a failure, and not representative of the greenhouse effect related to CO2 in our atmosphere. The video as presented, is not only faked in post production, the premise is also false and could never work with the equipment they demonstrated. Even with superior measurement equipment it doesn’t work, but more importantly, it couldn’t work as advertised.
The design failure was the glass cookie jar combined with infrared heat lamps.
It is clear that CO2 is not responsible for heating the planet as proposed by Al Gore. We are dealing with a scientific hoax. I am forwarding Anthony Watts results to all the Congresman and Senators on my e-mail list. As I wrote above, it is hard to address something that is not happening.