View Single Post
  #10  
Old August 8th 09, 01:54 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jim Logajan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,958
Default Rutan on Global Warming

"Dan Luke" wrote:
"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .
"Dan Luke" wrote:
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" wrote:
http://www.airventure.org/news/2009/090731_rutan.html

"He said data shows that concerns about global warming are false.
"CO2 is plant food, not a pollutant," he said. "It's been 20 times
as high as it now. If you have a 1.2 percent increase in cloud
formation and precipitation, it offsets a 100 percent increase of
CO2 in the atmosphere."

Gosh, Burt Rutan is climate genius, too!


So which of his numbers is wrong?


Which of his numbers is relevant?


I thought they were all relevant. Warmer air holds more moisture, therefore
presumably more cloud formation and precipitation might occur.

The odd thing is, if cloud formation and precipitation increase to
"offset" an increase in CO2, I expect it would happen precisely because the
atmosphere _had_ warmed. So his numbers are "merely" useful in determining
the equilibrium point that the atmosphere might warm to - not that no
warming would take place or that it isn't a concern.

He knows more than the scientists. Impressive!


"Locus ab auctoritate est infirmissimus"


I would say the argument from cluelessness is weakest.

Rutan charged that climate scientists have it wrong, setting himself
as a superior authority. Is he?


Why not comment respectfully on his alleged facts and line of argument
rather than do the online equivalent of sneering?

I don't agree with Rutan, but I'm not a climate scientist either. Are you?
Ads