| | | Maybe you can elaborate on this comment, particularly the "FOR SURE" and what you mean by "1/2 hardiness".
Also, re "closed minds"; if you think any of the naysayers on this board will have any "open mind" about your "anthropogenic GW is that in large cities definitely show some" comment, well I won't say it...OK, I will...I got a bridge for sale...
Actually, this is one of the things that us skeptics have been most critical about with the AGW scientologist's methods. There are absolutely measurable ground temperature differentials between a cities and areas covered by vegetation. Cities are called "heat Islands" because the asphalt and rooftops absorb the energy and then radiate it back out locally. Many of the temperature measuring stations that are referenced in the studies started out in open fields, and then as the area developed, became surrounded by buildings and roads. Scientific accuracy when measuring a variable is a function of the reduction of other variables. If you can't eliminate all obvious variables, then you must at least identify them. It has been proven that, not only did many of the measuring stations have changed environments (from rural to city), but in some cases they were located adjacent to heating vents on buildings.
Referring to the heat island effect found in cities as AGW is, of course, contradictory. There is nothing global about it. It is all local.
You can see (feel, measure) the same effect in the lava fields in hawaii or, if in California on I40 on the way out to Needles at the Pisgah Volcano lava fields, or on the Hwy 395 east of Little Lake, or just a little bit further north at Red Hill. Exposed basaltic lava flows mimic the heat island effects found on asphalt covered areas in cities.
That being said, are the skeptics really the ones with closed minds?
(edit: longnshort said it with a lot fewer words, but yeah...what he said) |
|
