[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: EthhWuLpUHfnQDAsuB
Date: 12 Jul 2012
Time: 11:22:10 -0700
Remote Name: 99.169.46.186
There is, finally, a pheuislbd rebuttal to the extraordinary paper by Gerlich and Tsheuschner in IJMP(B). And at the same time, there is a reply by G&T to the rebuttal.This is scraping the bottom of the barrel of arguments against AGW. There is good discussion at the Rabbet Run; I am collecting all the blog links I can find at Duae Quartunciae; Stoat puts in his oar; and there is a new Climate Physics Forums bulletin board with a thread for discussion of the rebuttal and reply. I'm plugging here unashamedly. I am the admin of the bulletin board, and also one of the authors of the rebuttal, and I blog at Duae Quartunciae.Giving all the relevant links is overload. Click on my name for the bulletin board. Search for the blog posts; there will be more of them coming up, I guess. And here is the journal link:The abstracts for the rebuttal and reply can be found online at the pages for . The rebuttal and reply are:Comment On Falsification Of The Atmospheric Co2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics , by Joshua B. Halpern, Christopher M. Colose, Chris Ho-Stuart, Joel D. Shore, Arthur P. Smith and Jf6rg Zimmermann.Reply To Comment On Falsification Of The Atmospheric Co2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics', by Joshua B. Halpern, Christopher M. Colose, Chris Ho-Stuart, Joel D. Shore, Arthur P. Smith, Jf6rg Zimmermann , by Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D. Tscheuschner[DC: It is indeed unfortunate that you and your co-authors had to spend time on this, but it is very important to respond to papers that are so obviously flawed. Let me add my congratulations and heartfelt thanks to you and the rest of the writing team. ]