All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Friday, 31 August 2012

Carbon is innocent! New Paper. Plus UPDATE.

Let me outta here!
It is weird that the alarmists refer to carbon instead of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is two oxygen atoms bonded to a single carbon atom. Get it? The senior partner is oxygen and the junior partner is carbon. Why then shouldn't the alarmists, if they want simplification, call it oxygen?

How does these sound?
  • "There will be no oxygen tax under a government that I lead!"
  • Oxygen Tax.
  • Oxygen Trading schemes.

Doesn't ring true, does it?

The reason for the use of the word "carbon" is to somehow suggest something, dirty, grimy.

If we use their terminology to refer to H2O or water, we would only refer to the junior partner and ask for a glass of oxygen. See how ridiculous it is?

Anyhow, NCTCS blog has consistently referred to the lack of evidence to "convict" carbon dioxide, we have written of the 800 year lag between temperature rise and rise in CO2, (Link Jo Nova) but we now have a peer reviewed paper as back-up.

The peer reviewed journal Global And Planetary Change have published a paper by Ole Humlum at al : 

The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature

(link:  http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2012.08.008)    (abstract: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818112001658?v=s5)

The Hockey Schtick writes (Link)

New blockbuster paper finds man-made CO2 is not the driver of global warming

An important new paper published today in Global and Planetary Change finds that changes in CO2 follow rather than lead global air surface temperature and that "CO2 released from use of fossil fuels have little influence on the observed changes in the amount of atmospheric CO2" The paper finds the "overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere," in other words, the opposite of claims by global warming alarmists that CO2 in the atmosphere drives land and ocean temperatures. Instead, just as in the ice cores, CO2 levels are found to be a lagging effect of ocean warming, not significantly related to man-made emissions, and not the driver of warming.
Read more at The Hockey Schtick.

UPDATE:

 
Over at the psuedo-science blog of youno, the chief blogger, self-confessed pseudonymous blogger has picked me up on nomenclature. He thinks that I am wrong when I want the tax on carbon to be called a carbon dioxide tax. 

 let’s name it for what it is and we’ll name the “junior partner” second. Let’s call it aDioxygen carbide tax. Yes yes, that sounds much better. "

I think I get it!  But wait, there’s more! 
Most people learn in about year 8 at school (that might explain it) that there is a convention for chemical nomenclature. It’s not difficult. For the sake of keeping it even simpler I won’t mention the conventions when there is a charge involved. For binary metal/non-metal compounds, the metal goes first and the non-metal has ‘ide’ added e.g Chlorine + sodium becomes Sodium Chloride (NaCl).
But hang on, youno, that’s my argument – put the carbon first and then put di (ie two) before the oxygen therefore carbon dioxide. So are you making my argument for me? Or are you insisting that it is OK to call Carbon dioxide just plain carbon?
 
So according to you, therefore carbon can be used, in nomenclature for any carbon compound, is that right?

So carbon mono-oxide and carbon dioxide can both be called carbon, right? 

Tetrafluoroethylene  C2F2 and acetylene C2H2 can correctly be described as carbon.

 I think that I am getting it.   

Propylene C3H3 and butane C4H10  and benzene C6H6 similarly should be just called carbon.

Youno blogger has picked me up on nomenclature. He thinks that I am wrong when I want the tax on carbon to be called a carbon dioxide tax.
let’s name it for what it is and we’ll name the “junior partner” second. Let’s call it a Dioxygen carbide tax. Yes yes, that sounds much better."
I think I get it!  But wait, there’s more! 
Most people learn in about year 8 at school (that might explain it) that there is a convention for chemical nomenclature. It’s not difficult. For the sake of keeping it even simpler I won’t mention the conventions when there is a charge involved. For binary metal/non-metal compounds, the metal goes first and the non-metal has ‘ide’ added e.g Chlorine + sodium becomes Sodium Chloride (NaCl).
But hang on, youno, that’s my argument – put the carbon first and then put di (ie two) before the oxygen therefore carbon dioxide. So, are you making my argument for me? Or are you insisting that it is OK to call Carbon dioxide just plain carbon?

Because, if I understand you correctly, according to you, carbon can be used, in nomenclature, for any carbon compound, is that right?

So carbon mono-oxide and carbon dioxide can both be called carbon, right? 

Tetrafluoroethylene  C2F2 and acetylene C2H2 can correctly be described as carbon. 

I think that I am getting it.   

Propylene C3H3 and C4H10 and benzene C6H6 similarly should just be called carbon.

Simple isn't it? Or is it Youno who is the simpleton?
 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment





All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!