315 degrees Celsius
Hot enough for you?
I have been to some very hot places in my life. The absolute hottest was a flying visit to Kuwait City shortly after the first Desert Storm. There were still bullet pock-marks in the walls. Suspicious brown stains could still be seen here and there. But this was neither here nor there, because the overwhelming feature of Kuwaiti life is the extraordinary temperature and bone-dry air.
On my first morning there, I woke up at 5:30 AM for a 7:00 AM start and opened the curtains. It was a very well air-conditioned room, with double glazing. I saw a mark on the window and rubbed it with my thumb. Then I leapt back and rushed off to the bathroom to run some cold water over my thumb. The inside window of industrial specification double glazing at 5:30 in the morning was hot enough to fry an egg on.
When I went outside it was already 50 degrees Celsius.
It was absolutely the hottest I have ever been in my life.
If you were raised from birth in this and wore white, loose clothing, you might possibly get comfortable. Possibly. Nothing can survive without extraordinary amounts of water, provided at stunning cost made possible only by access to a sea of oil.
The surface of Venus is 462 degrees Celsius. Despite Venus’s atmosphere, water cannot form in this environment and it impossible for life as we know it to form or survive.
The barren surface of Mercury is also around 450 degrees Celsius.
Such temperatures are extraordinary. Exposure to such temperatures would lead to your body being dessicated to a mummy-like husk in minutes.
On the 13th of September 1922, the hottest temperature ever recorded on Earth was 57.8 degrees Celsius, at Al ‘Aziziyah, Libya. On 10 July 1913, the hottest temperature in the USA was recorded in the fearsome Death Valley desert. The hottest temperature ever recorded in the UK was 38.5 degrees Celsius in Faversham on 10 August 2003.
The business of measuring temperatures has, mercifully become something that does not require the arduous involvement of people manually recording things. With satellite technology, pin-point precision in recording our temperatures has allowed us to become aware that mankind’s obsession with progress is slowly boiling the planet.
So what are we to make of the fact that satellites, under the control of an organisation that claims that we are cooking the planet, has been “cooking” the temperature record in certain areas by between five and seven degrees Celsius? Apparently, the sleepy backwater above recorded a temperature of 315 degrees Celsius! The Great Lakes were recorded as having had a temperature of 200 degrees Celsius, or twice the boiling point of water.
Is it not strange that a body that promotes the idea of catastrophic man-made global warming has been claiming that its satellites offered unimpeachable data, while disseminating completely impossible data?
What are we to make of this?
August 26, 2010 at 20:04
-
I used to work in Kuwait, drydocking ships.
It really is warm in the
bottom of a huge concrete lined hole in the ground, which contains a huge
steel box, absorbing sunlight and radiating heat down below.
However, I was
told by Kuwaitis that the Government had a long-standing
- August 26, 2010 at 15:45
-
Some of the best proofs against all this environmental hocus pocus come
from plain geography and historical facts.
ie. According to the high
priests of global warming, the glaciers are receding madly. (This is probably
true anywhere in the vicinity of the hot smelly breath of an
environmentalist). There are many carefully selected, before and after photos
to “prove” their viewpoint.
Anyone can persuade gullible acolytes to their
cause.
However, how do they explain simple things like the WW2 Lighting
fighters which crash landed on the Greenland icecap in 1942. A whole squadron
of aircraft had to be ditched on the ice, and then abandoned after running out
of fuel.
With the advent of the craze for resurrecting old warbirds,
researchers set out to find these aircraft. They knew exactly where they had
been abandoned but it still took attempts by 11 different teams before they
found signs of them. Finally in 1988 a team using steam to bore down 268 feet
under the ice surface where able to start a recovery.
This brings into
question the mantra of universal glacier shrinkage. 268ft of ice had been
added to the glacier surface in just 46 years.
The usefulness of facts like this are that they can’t be fraudulently
altered by warmists. They are good for challenging the P.C. consensus.
Another area of interest in this regard is the number of coastal towns
around the U.K. which now find themselves several miles inland from the coast
as the sea level has DROPPED over the years. (Or maybe the UK has tilted a
little!). This has not received any mention that I can find, but would be an
interesting bit of information to have at hand.
I wonder if anyone can help
out on this idea. If you live in a port that has “moved” away can you check it
out in terms of height above sea level and post it here.
I am sure there are other obvious “nonscientific”, plain view, untampered,
facts which can be used, if any other lay man wants to add to these two
thoughts.
- August 25, 2010 at 12:41
-
JuliaM’s correct – follow the money and you can see the corruption.
To keep the flow of goodies coming into the trough most of the key
measuring organisations around the world have been manipulating data for over
15 years now. Our own Met Office (and its well-funded tentacles in the Uni of
East Anglia and the Hadley Centre) are at the forefront of the scam. NASA and
the infamous Dr Hanson are also up there with them on the top step of the
podium of corruption. Seeing as they are two of the three global data sources
used by everyone else then it’s easy to see how far from the truth a very
small, bigoted inner circle of Warble Gloaming alarmists have been able to
move the debate. Black is now white; up is now down.
Forget Climategate and the gummint whitewash over UEA scientists deleting
awkward data to “hide the decline”, checkout recent data manipulation that
turned a 20-year temperature fall in the Himalyas into a rise. Or Darwin
airport “corrections” where the same fiddles happened to turn down into up. Or
Antarctica where only one out of 17 monitoring stations is used as source
(funny how its numbers are the only ones rising across the whole continent,
all the others show a fall). Or the use of a tourist guide as source data by
the UN’s IPCC. Or the removal of 2/3 of weather monitoring stations from the
global program in the last decade – but only the ones where temperaturs are
falling though. Or the claim that global ice coverage is declining when NASA’s
own numbers show it’s been rising for several years.
And so it goes on…these teams of taxpayer funded scientists have spent too
long with their noses in the trough are now rotten to the core and completely
untrustworthy. Yet the UK has now signed up to spend
- August 25, 2010 at 09:37
-
Years ago, some climate scientists were warning that Earth was about to
enter another ice age, and that this could happen quite suddenly, as a tipping
point was reached. Since then, we’ve been told that peanut butter is
carcinogenic, that bird flu, then swine flu, would decimate the population.
Man-made global warming has been a very successful scare. It has enabled
wide-ranging increases in tithes, sorry, taxes, based on forcing people going
about their normal daily lives to feel guilty for doing so, and therefore
accepting that they must be punished through taxation. It has acquired some of
the characteristics of a religion, heretics being reviled, particularly those
infidels within the scientific community.
One thing is for sure – since
Earth first had an atmosphere, its climate has been changing one way or
another, long before any white Europeans were around to blame.
Rather than
hand large sums of green-tax money to politicians to steal and waste, rather
than try, Canute-like, to meddle with a huge and complex system like the
climate, many of whose interconnected factors are still poorly understood,
many more still being discovered on a regular basis, perhaps our resources
would better be directed toward dealing with the effects of whatever climate
change actually occurs.
- August 25,
2010 at 09:01
-
“What are we to make of this? ”
Erm… Its all bollocks?
- August
25, 2010 at 09:04
-
Or: ‘Never trust a scientist, until you’ve found out who’s paying
him…’
- August 25, 2010 at 08:48
-
There seems to be a failure of application of “concept of reasonableness”,
possibly brought about by ignorance of the subject or the units of
measurement.
I heard some weather-girly recently announce that a place in
the UK had suffered 33 metres of rain.
- August 25, 2010 at 08:14
-
” The hottest temperature ever recorded in the UK was ….. on 10 August
2003.”
Phew! So we’re not getting warmer then.
Comments are closed.
{ 8 comments }