With all due respect, I call bullshit on such a claim.grounding all the planes after 9/11 changed the temperature by 2 degrees
With all due respect, I call bullshit on such a claim.
Its like a simpson episode come to life
I actually suspect that if successful it would have immediate and possibly dramatic results. Just grounding all the planes after 9/11 changed the temperature by 2 degrees, blocking a portion of solar energy could have far more impact.
Help me highlander your our only hope!It's worse than a Simpson's episode. Only The Highlander can save us now.
It's worse than a Simpson's episode. Only The Highlander can save us now.
I actually suspect that if successful it would have immediate and possibly dramatic results. Just grounding all the planes after 9/11 changed the temperature by 2 degrees, blocking a portion of solar energy could have far more impact.
BBC - Climate Change: The Blog of Bloom: 9/11 research challenged: contrails aren't turning up the heat
A suprising blog from the Bloom team about climate change and the things people are saying and doing about it.www.bbc.co.uk
The most hilarious part of all that was that it killed tons and tons of climate models. Everybody in the business started with the assumption that contrails increased global warming and we had to strongly regulate the airline industry in order to fight climate change. Then planes actually got grounded and they discovered, oops! The contrails actually reduced temperate measurably and all their models were wrong because they started with a fallacious base assumption.
Somehow they didn't get around to wanting to subsidize airlines in order to fight global warming though...
That's... the normal interpretation of that phrase? The temperature change went up by 1 degree at the low end (actually closer to 1.1) and the same on the high end. If the temperature only went up or down I would have called it an "increase" or "decrease." You use flat "change" when it's not in just one direction.The first source you have says there was a 2 degree increase in the difference between high and low temperatures. This is pretty different from at least the normal interpretation of "changed the temperature by 2 degrees."
That's... the normal interpretation of that phrase? The temperature change went up by 1 degree at the low end (actually closer to 1.1) and the same on the high end. If the temperature only went up or down I would have called it an "increase" or "decrease." You use flat "change" when it's not in just one direction.
yes, but i'm more worried about it going the same way as futurama's sun mirrorSimpsons...did...it?
yes, but i'm more worried about it going the same way as futurama's sun mirror