Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Global warming
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="av8torntn" data-source="post: 1741776" data-attributes="member: 8259"><p>I've addressed the Global Warming topic to death. It's not my fault that you can't come to terms with it. You refuse to acknowledge the science behind it and resort to name calling. That is not my fault either. I can do that with you as well if you like. I've linked to somewhere in the neighborhood of thirty published papers in the thread by multiple sources all claiming different things. All you can talk about is the funding and the one you attack the most has been funded millions of dollars from government sources. That is funny no matter how you look at it. You cry and whine and moan but in the end it is very apparent that you cannot back up your position that it is a settled science.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Funding sources and grants that you question.</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Impact of Marine and Dust Aerosols on Atlantic Tropical Cyclone Development. <strong>NSF</strong>, $349,901, 4/1/11-3/31/14 (co-PI).<br /> <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Impact of Aerosols on the Arctic Hydrological Cycle. <strong>NASA</strong>, 06/01/07-05/31/10, $480,000 (co-PI).<br /> <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Spatio-temporal Variability of Aerosol Load in the Tropics: Interaction with Precipitation and the Radiation Budget. <strong>NOAA</strong>, 5/01/08-4/30/11, $366,000 (co-PI)<br /> <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Towards the Understanding and Parameterization of High Latitude Cloud and Radiation Processes.<strong> DOE</strong> ARM, 12/01/02-11/30/08, $720,000 (PI)<br /> <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Global analysis of ocean surface fluxes of heat and freshwater: satellite products, NWP analyses, and CMIP simulations. <strong>NASA</strong>, 10/1/05-9/30/10, $1.4M (PI).<br /> <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Parameterization of cloud particle activation and diffusional growth. <strong>NASA</strong>, 11/05-10/08, $450,000.<br /> <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">UAV Systems Analysis for Earth Observations: Education and Outreach. <strong>NASA,</strong> 3/05-3/08,<br /> <br /> $350,000 (PI)<br /> <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Arctic Regional Climate Model Intercomparison Project: Evaluation and Interpretation Using Data<br /> <br /> Products from FIRE.ACE. NASA, 12/03-12/07, $525,000. (PI)<br /> <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Applications of Aerosondes to long-term measurements of the atmosphere and sea ice surface in the<br /> <br /> Beaufort/Chukchi sector of the Arctic Ocean, NSF, 9/1/99-8/31/06, $3,997,402. (PI)<br /> <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Climate variability of the Alaskan North Slope Coastal Region: Observations, simulations, and<br /> <br /> integrated assessment, NSF/NOAA, 1/1/01-1/1/05, $2,404,308 (Co-PI) <br /> </li> </ul></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="av8torntn, post: 1741776, member: 8259"] I've addressed the Global Warming topic to death. It's not my fault that you can't come to terms with it. You refuse to acknowledge the science behind it and resort to name calling. That is not my fault either. I can do that with you as well if you like. I've linked to somewhere in the neighborhood of thirty published papers in the thread by multiple sources all claiming different things. All you can talk about is the funding and the one you attack the most has been funded millions of dollars from government sources. That is funny no matter how you look at it. You cry and whine and moan but in the end it is very apparent that you cannot back up your position that it is a settled science. Funding sources and grants that you question. [LIST] [*]Impact of Marine and Dust Aerosols on Atlantic Tropical Cyclone Development. [B]NSF[/B], $349,901, 4/1/11-3/31/14 (co-PI). [*]Impact of Aerosols on the Arctic Hydrological Cycle. [B]NASA[/B], 06/01/07-05/31/10, $480,000 (co-PI). [*]Spatio-temporal Variability of Aerosol Load in the Tropics: Interaction with Precipitation and the Radiation Budget. [B]NOAA[/B], 5/01/08-4/30/11, $366,000 (co-PI) [*]Towards the Understanding and Parameterization of High Latitude Cloud and Radiation Processes.[B] DOE[/B] ARM, 12/01/02-11/30/08, $720,000 (PI) [*]Global analysis of ocean surface fluxes of heat and freshwater: satellite products, NWP analyses, and CMIP simulations. [B]NASA[/B], 10/1/05-9/30/10, $1.4M (PI). [*]Parameterization of cloud particle activation and diffusional growth. [B]NASA[/B], 11/05-10/08, $450,000. [*]UAV Systems Analysis for Earth Observations: Education and Outreach. [B]NASA,[/B] 3/05-3/08, $350,000 (PI) [*]Arctic Regional Climate Model Intercomparison Project: Evaluation and Interpretation Using Data Products from FIRE.ACE. NASA, 12/03-12/07, $525,000. (PI) [*]Applications of Aerosondes to long-term measurements of the atmosphere and sea ice surface in the Beaufort/Chukchi sector of the Arctic Ocean, NSF, 9/1/99-8/31/06, $3,997,402. (PI) [*]Climate variability of the Alaskan North Slope Coastal Region: Observations, simulations, and integrated assessment, NSF/NOAA, 1/1/01-1/1/05, $2,404,308 (Co-PI) [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Global warming
Top
