muso wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 12:35pm:


we cant/dont/wont harness it?

A lot of the suns energy is reradiated back into space: reflected by clouds or radiated back out into space at night, etc.

But the question is relevance not correctness.

Maybe---if he can prove solar activity has been increasing. It hasn't and so the statement is irrelevant.

But it IS increasing now. Prepare for a HOT summer--think about very young and very old relatives--any preparations you can make for them?

And a constant amount of solar energy--and constant is implied in Plimer's statement--has no effect on global warming.

pjb05 wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 3:51pm:


It hasn't been steadilly warming since the last Ice Age. It warms after an ice age or the ice age would still be going on. the last ice age ended 15,000 years ago

Darwin wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 3:04pm:


You've sort of got it there Darwin. Global warming has to do with increasing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

The energy that warms the atmosphere comes from the sun, and the Earth's heat is currently increasing as a result of the enhanced Greenhouse effect. With increasing CO2 levels, an increasing amount ofthe sun's heat is trapped in the lower atmosphere.

Comparing total energy generation to Energy from the Sun is a total red herring. It's almost like claiming that the argument is about heat from energy usage on Earth as compared to heat from the Sun.

The statement is therefore true, but irrelevant.

What is relevant is the greenhouse gas production. I find it impossible to believe that Plimer doesn't know that already.

Energy calculations are not usually part of the Geology curriculum, but at the time when he graduated in Geology at UNSW in the late 60's, his first year subjects must have included other science subjects.

Bituminous Coal (picking the worst case) has an Energy value of about 27 GJ/ tonne(1), but a tonne of coal when combusted emits about 90kg of CO2 per GJ (2).

The first figure relates to the heat given off when it's burnt. That is irrelevant for Global Warming because it's insignificant. The second figure is all that counts.

The total coal burnt last year was around 6 billion tonnes. The  heat given off by that was about 160billion GJ. (4)

The heat produced might sound like a lot, but it's less than 0.5% of the energy produced from the CO2 trapping extra heat from the sun in the lower atmosphere, so it's not relevant to Global Warming.

Just for entertainment, I'll include a profile of another denialist  

Apart from telling furfies about Global Warming, he loves to tell people about his seat in the House of Lords. As a Viscount, he doesn't actually have one, but his personal crest is a nice shade of pink and it looks like the House of Lords Crest. He clearly has impeccable dress sense, and his qualifications in Classical Studies  means that he knows all about Mars and Jupiter.

I'd say he knows a fair bit about the social habits of Ancient Greek (men) too.  

muso wrote on Nov 7^th, 2009 at 5:46pm:



In any discussion about the Earth's climate, every true statement that includes the word 'Sun' is relevant.