It’s come to my attention from Cedric that the quote below may not apply to CO2 as I originally thought but likely includes the potent greenhouse gas: water vapour. As such the title of my article might be misleading.
Reblogged: Ian Plimer, geologist, blows up the enviro crusade with a few observations
“..when the volcano Mt. Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.”
And that eruption ultimately had a cooling effect!
The CO2 scam detonated by ‘Gaia’ herself, every day of every year …
Originally posted on 
Judith Curry’s new post highlights a Ph.D. paper that suggests CO2 has a cooling effect over Antarctica, due to temperature inversion.
See ‘Antarctic specific features of the greenhouse effect’ by Holger Schmithusen – here:
http://judithcurry.com/2015/07/06/new-research-on-atmospheric-radiative-transfer/
If we were in the same company as the academic climatologists, this is the point at which they would be eating their words and looking sheepish.
Any scientist worth the name must now know that we were right to be sceptical of the claims of “settled science” and complete certainty in their forecasts.
The question now is not whether they were wrong, but how much they got wrong – indeed it might be easier to ask “how much did they get right”.
@ S.S
Do you recall the post where you said the Slayers had the physics right but were not very good at PR?
There is no way for CO2 to “warm” the planet via “back radiation”. CO2 does help cool the planet by radiating heat off into space high up in the atmosphere but other gases are as important or more important even at the cooling. CO2 is a non-issue.
What did you do to actually verify this? Did you look at any numbers at all?
There’s this thing called google. You should do some fact checking.
“There’s this thing called google”
Look at the top right where it says: “I have removed Google ads due to Google’s political bias on climate”.
And in case it isn’t really obvious it says “reblogged” it doesn’t say “I am saying this is true”, because unlike the climate extremists who all make a fat killing from this scam I don’t get paid (not even the pittance I used to get from google) so I don’t check every article that I think is worth highlighting.
I don’t check every article that I think is worth highlighting.
Well, that’s not very good is it.
Just to let you know…..the article is crap. Total nonsense.
Now, you don’t have to use google, of course, but if you do some really, really simple fact-checking……you’ll find out for yourself that it’s just silly.
Not even close to being accurate.
Basically, Plimer is leading you by the nose.
What’s really sad is nobody who commented on the article even bothered to fact check for themselves. They just meekly went along with the herd.
I’d never do that.
If you want to call yourself a skeptic, you should try and act like one.
Skepticism is a process; not a position.
Seriously, take 30 seconds out of your super busy schedule and fact check this puppy.
If you need any help, I’ll check in tomorrow.
Checking online I cannot find the original from Plimer. However it seems to me Plimer may have been counting water vapour – which although something like 20x more potent than CO2, is not what the quote implies. So, I’ll add a note.
However it seems to me Plimer may have…
No. Don’t guess. Don’t cross your fingers and hope for some exit route.
Just fact check.
And if you find out by yourself that it’s completely wrong, then be brutally honest about it.
Go onto the search engine of your choice and type in “Plimer” and “volcanoes” and it will pop right up.
Plimer has been saying this for years. It’s his thing.
Even mentioned it in a book he wrote years ago.
But, in a way, it’s not even that important who said it.
What’s really important is that this is said…..by everybody in your echo chamber community.
It’s a shop worn talking point.
An oldie but a goodie.
A zombie that will never die no matter how many times it takes a bullet to the head.
It’s a P.R.A.T.T.
It’s been used so often and it gets so repeated that it’s part of the list of debunked zombie talking points.
The weird thing about this particular P.R.A.T.T is how easy it is to debunk. There are a variety of scientific communities out there that…..look at volcanoes. It’s what they do. We know about volcanoes. There’s plenty of good information about them.
It’s something you can count.
The stuff they eject? Well, you can count that too.
Not me personally, of course, there are scientific communities that do that stuff.
Same diff’ for human emissions. This gets measured. It gets counted. So….you can take those two numbers and compare them. Throw in as many possible variables you like. Not really that hard. Certainly not for the various scientific communities.
But what makes it extra easy for the average person on the street is that….since it’s such a famous zombie talking point, you can just type in the question itself online and go to the first mainstream scientific community that deals with volcanoes and…you can see the numbers yourself.
It’s not just wrong.
It’s badly wrong.
It’s not just badly wrong.
It’s famously, badly wrong.
Any luck?