Can anyone confirm or comment on the results here?

In this note I have calculated the real total emissivity of the atmospheric carbon dioxide at its current partial pressure and instantaneous temperature to be 0.002.

Clearly carbon dioxide is not a nearly blackbody system as suggested by the IPCC and does not have an emissivity of 1.0. Quite the opposite, given its total absorptivity, which is the same than its total emissivity, the carbon dioxide is a quite inefficient – on absorbing and emitting radiation – making it a gray-body.

Accepting that carbon dioxide is not a black body and that the potential of the carbon dioxide to absorb and emit radiant energy is negligible, I conclude that the AGW hypothesis is based on unreal magnitudes, unreal processes and unreal physics.

http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2011/03/total-emissivity-of-the-earth-and-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide/

I've just noticed that the motion for the Spectator debate on Tuesday (discussed here - see post at 12:04 PM) has been changed from "The Global Warming Hysteria is over. Time for a Return to Sanity" to "The Global Warming Concern is over. Time for a Return to Sanity". Unfortunately it's not much of an improvement: the issue is not whether the concern is over (it patently isn't), but is it justified?

PS: For those attending, I still suggest that we meet afterwards in The Hoop and Toy at the end of Exhibition Road.

Just came accross this interesting web site:

http://www.claverton-energy.com/

An eclectic mix of interesting papers, with a good sprinkling of detail, particularly on costings of various power generation methods. Looks like a very wide variety of views as well.

Allan Savory – Feasta Annual Lecture 2009

Keeping Cattle: Cause of Cure for climate crisis?

He demonstrates how keeping higher numbers of cattle on the same ground for short times (7days), then moving them to new ground (mimicking natural herd movements) rejuvenates grassland in Zimbabwe, regardless of drought conditions!

i.e. he demonstrates that it is land management and not climate causes land degradation and desertification.

His results in reversing desertification through increasing the numbers of livestock and managing them in a more natural way is almost unbelievable.

short version http://player.vimeo.com/video/8291896 (10 mins)

full version http://player.vimeo.com/video/8239427

Dr David Evans’ address to the Anti-Carbon-Tax rally, Perth Australia, 23 March 2011.

Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen.

The debate about global warming has reached ridiculous proportions and is full of micro thin half-truths and misunderstandings. I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, understands the evidence, was once an alarmist, but am now a skeptic. Watching this issue unfold has been amusing but, lately, worrying. This issue is tearing society apart, making fools and liars out of our politicians.

Who is David Evans?

Dr David Evans consulted full-time for the Australian Greenhouse Office (now the Department of Climate Change) from 1999 to 2005, and part-time 2008 to 2010, modeling Australia’s carbon in plants, debris, mulch, soils, and forestry and agricultural products. Evans is a mathematician and engineer, with six university degrees including a PhD from Stanford University in electrical engineering. The area of human endeavor with the most experience and sophistication in dealing with feedbacks and analyzing complex systems is electrical engineering, and the most crucial and disputed aspects of understanding the climate system are the feedbacks. The evidence supporting the idea that CO2 emissions were the main cause of global warming reversed itself from 1998 to 2006, causing Evans to move from being a warmist to a skeptic.

Read the rest of it here:

http://joannenova.com.au/2011/03/david-evans-carbon-modeler-says-its-a-scam/

I see palaeoclimatologist William Ruddiman is off on his own. A CO2 rise 8000 years ago is now a sure sign of intensive farming at that time. Must have been a lot of land clearance in the Americas, Africa and Australia, I guess, along with absolutely frantic efforts in Europe/Asia.

I've just read a delightful post from Donna Laframboise on 'No Frakking Consensus' site, detailing the tiny population of the empire which calls itself the IPCC, definitely worth a visit/ mention here!

Small wonder they get a consensus.

I noticed the Earthquake and Tsunami in Japan being linked to climate change again this morning.

On BBC breakfast there was a discussion about climate week. It was a discussion about whether we can afford the current green taxes. The gentleman was saying that we really didn’t need a climate week (I agree), but then went on to say that everybody knows the climate is changing, especially over the past 2 weeks with the Earthquake and Tsunami in Japan.

All those on the couch nodded. I hung my head in shame!

Frosty
Apologies. There just seemed to be a sort of convergence between your views on some matters and the broad philosophy of eco-protest.
I stand corrected.

Sam, FTR that's not me. I used to post here & WUWT as Pete (for some years starting when Bish posted Casper although not prolific), then two other pete's started posting, I made one post as 'frosty was pete' here and WUWT then continued as Frosty. I use my home email addy which contains my name, both prior to the name change and after so as to leave a clue for the BIsh. I explained the name change in a reply to Josh on here some months ago. I rarely post at WUWT now because the comments get too big to follow, I can't even find my original posts in a timely fashion on there sometimes.

The link I posted to ask an opinion of BBD was the financial history of the Russian revolution, it contained easily checked quotes from Churchill highlighting the bankers backing for both sides, which was backing my opinion that banksters instigate wars and regime change for profit and power, but the point was lost. Debating is one thing, defending every word when skewed out of context, so much so it looked like bigoted point scoring to me, seemed less than worth while.

I have no agenda, just trying to make sense of the mad world we live in. HTH.