by John Ransom
Monday, January 20, 2014
Scientists have recently discovered that rough surfaces
may actually reduce the amount of friction and drag after testing the
hypothesis on the microscopic level.
“According to researchers at UCLA, rough surfaces lined
with tiny ridges may actually reduce drag,” says the Science Recorder.
“Modeling fluid flow between two surfaces lined with tiny ridges, researchers
found tiny ridges actually reduce drag, allowing the for fluid to flow around
in a more efficient manner….This is not the first time scientists have sought
to create models based on rough ridges to reduce drag. However, advances in
technology now allow scientists to create models on a microscopic level.”
Yes, but it’s the first time that the testing has been
linked to global warming.
Of course by now we should know that EVERYTHING
eventually relates to global warming.
Or income inequality.
So, anywho: Scientists says that by reducing drag on
sea-going vessel less fuel will be need… and therefore…she’s a WITCH!
OK, not really.
But almost.
The scientists actually say since sea transport accounts
for 4 percent of greenhouse gases, reducing drag will have “a substantial
impact on global warming emissions,” because of the reduced fuel requirements
with less drag.
Hey, when you are reaching for straws even a fraction of
4 percent reduction is a “substantial” amount-- especially when the Chinese are
ratcheting up output of greenhouse gases way past the 4 percent mark.
And that is what confuses me about the science behind
greenhouse gases and global warming, especially as it applies to policy.
Years ago I offered to shave my head bald and eat a can
of dog food if someone—anyone-- could show me a credible scientific paper that
demonstrates how the earth would cool even a fraction of a degree Fahrenheit by
enacting a carbon tax here in the United States, such as the one proposed by
the Democrats in 2009 and 2010.
I’m still waiting.
Because one would suppose that in policies promoted by
properly-thinking, modern progressives-- who worship all things science— and
have no time for mumbo jumbo about faith and religion, that at the very least
they’d have data to support that their policies will cool the earth, solve
world hunger, bring people out of poverty, improve education, create income
equality, or pay female White House staffers commensurate with men.
OK, the last one was outrageous. Never gonna happen under
Obama.
What was I thinking?
At the very least, I was thinking that people like
Ericynot, BoatBoy, DoctorRoy or Hillinger would enjoy me being bald and eating
dog food.
Heck, I’d even make a video of it.
But the problem remains: Sea levels aren’t rising, storms
aren’t nastier and more brutish. The only science that’s being done is the type
where estimates are used where data is called for and predictions are being
used instead of conclusions.
Stumped by the fact that temperatures are not accurately
reflecting current climate “models”- in fact temperatures have remained stable
for 17 years- scientists on the government gravy train are trying to tie any
weather event to so-called climate change.
Or income inequality. Which really? Aren’t they the same
things?
Hurricanes? Global warming.
Tornadoes? Global warming?
Drought? Global warming?
Blizzards, dropping temperatures, meteorites, Big Gulps?
Global warming.
Last year I documented how researchers made up a map
showing how vegetation could change in the arctic because of global warming.
The map, no lie, was called the “most accurate map” ever
produced of its type.
A long last, scientists have revealed the single most
important document ever, I wrote. It’s a crayon-colored map showing how “trees”
could grow in the arctic.
If finally, mercifully, any one of the so-called “climate
models” that so far have failed to “model” climate accurately, suddenly and
then accurately begin to “model” climate in real time, then, well, WOW!
“Experts say the wooded areas in the region could
increase by 50% over the coming decades,” writes the UK’s Daily Mail, “and
accelerate global warming in the process. Researchers have unveiled the most
accurate map ever (!) of how vegetation could change in the region.”
In the meantime,ThinkProgress has published a remarkable
paper called Arctic Sea Ice Death Spiral And Cold Weather that proves, or at
least, says - same thing if you are a liberal - that global warming is to blame for
…cold weather in Germany.
Stumped by the fact that temperatures are not accurately
reflecting current climate “models”- in fact temperatures have remained stable
for 17 years- scientists on the government gravy train are trying to tie any
weather event to so-called climate change.
Even homosexuality has been tied to global warming via
population control.
“With the natural world on the brink of demise largely
because of overpopulation,” G. Roger Denson, a self-appointed social
theoretician wrote on the Huffington Post,“unrestrained homosexuality, as one
of a variety of ethical and democratic measures available to us today, offers
perhaps the most natural option to be enjoined.”
Unrestrained gayness?
Seriously?
Going in through the out door with another man doesn’t
seem “the most natural option to be enjoined” in trying to cool down the
earth’s atmosphere.
But in the interest of fairness if G. Roger Denson wants
to produce an actual scientific paper proving me wrong, I got a can of dog food
and clipping shears here waiting.
No comments:
Post a Comment