/me checks the date isn't April 1st.

Gut feeling... We have put enough energy out there to cause this?... not buying it. And had we put enough energy out there, then we would be seeing much more localised and noticeable and measurable effects.

But hey, at least we can try something for the coming ice age ;-)

Then like something from Alien and the Weyland Corp, Murdoch and his heirs have taken control of the planet with the Fox/Sky Corp and their microwave emitters. We are doomed...

The first line gives it away

"Because the vacuum of space acts as an insulator, microwave radio frequencies are scattered through our atmosphere at an accelerated rate."

So the vacuum of space acts as an insulator stopping microwave radiation getting out does it?

And it continues

"The Earth is a rotating electromagnetic field containing a dielectric material called water."

So the earth is an EM field one minute, the next it's completely made up of water?

And then it goes on:

"Sending oscillating microwave radio frequencies through an electromagnetic field into a dielectric material, such as water, creates radio frequency heating "

I would say you couldn't make this stuff up, but someone has.

Not sure why Martin plugged it here, except perhaps as a humorous diversion or an example of pseudoscience claptrap.

Martin, it fails so many smell tests, but perhaps that's just my science/engineering background. Would be interesting to test it out on literate but not science-literate people to see if it sounds plausible.

"The illustration shows that 65% is absorbed and 35% is reflected. Of the 35% that is reflected, only 4% is actually reflected from the surface of the Earth. This also can decrease with the emission more particles into the atmosphere. What does this mean? It means the amount of gasses in the atmosphere creates less sun rays from entering to the surface, in turn creating less reflection of those rays from the Earth. This fact makes the "Green House Gas" Theory flat out unscientific."

Well I'm glad that's sorted that out! What is this eejit smoking, and where can I get some?

Wow, almost right, except it isn't warming at the North Pole. (http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php). That's what you get when you simply believe the warmies and try to come up with another theory to thwart them.

He might like to explain how the Mars explorer gets it's information back to the Earth through this insulator.

"So the vacuum of space acts as an insulator stopping microwave radiation getting out does it?"

Yes. It does it by total internal reflection, as you would know if you had studied phisycs

"He might like to explain how the Mars explorer gets it's information back to the Earth through this insulator."

See above. Total internal reflection stops stuff getting out, but does not stop it getting in.

Yes. It does it by total internal reflection, as you would know if you had studied phisycs

Not only did I study Physics at university, I know how to spell it.

Radio reflection by the ionosphere is not the same thing as "the vacuum of space acts as an insulator"

As you would know if you had studied Physics.

"See above. Total internal reflection stops stuff getting out, but does not stop it getting in."

Ok how does NASA control the explorer, does it have access to galactic carrier pigeons?

How did NASA communicate with the astronauts on the moon. did they attach 230kmiles of optical fibre to the tail of the space craft. (You may be inadvertently proving what a lot of people have been saying, it was done in Arizona because NASA couldn't get the radio waves outside of the earth's atmosphere)

I don't want to dismiss your hypothesis our of hand, but you've got few holes in there that need filling before it will be accepted by the scientific and engineering communities.

You're going to have to help me a little bit in understanding how all microwave signals hit the top of the atmosphere at angles greater than their critical angle. I would have thought it would have been slightly more random than that.

Only by the same correlation logic that links warming to any metric that went up in the last half of the 20th century..... cost of Premiership football players, ownership of flared trousers, number of jalapeño peppers eaten by Yorkshiremen, appearaces of Carol Vordermann on TV.....

Why pick on microwaves?

Ping!

@geronimo
You should know that the moon astronauts were in a facility in the Arizona desert and not on the moon /attempted humour

Surely this theory fails in a similar way to CO2 in that the energy being broadcast is increasing whilst temperatures increase have stalled. Therefore the theory fails. It would be nice if a warmist came up with that argument.

"Radio reflection by the ionosphere is not the same thing as "the vacuum of space acts as an insulator"

As you would know if you had studied Physics."

The ionosphere reflects short waves because it is conductive at those frequencies (~3 - 30 MHz).

Nothing to do with the ionosphere. I am talking about the effect (well-known to *real* phisycists) where light and other em radiation is refracted at a boundary of differing refractive indices.

"...a propagating wave strikes a medium boundary at an angle larger than a particular critical angle with respect to the normal to the surface. If the refractive index is lower on the other side of the boundary and the incident angle is greater than the critical angle, the wave cannot pass through and is entirely reflected"

This is known (to phisycists) as "total internal reflection". Nothing to do with conductivity or the ionosphere. As, I explained, it prevents em radiation of all wavelengths (not just HF) from escaping.

"Surely this theory fails in a similar way to CO2 in that the energy being broadcast is increasing whilst temperatures increase have stalled."

This is due to an effect of nonlinearity known (to phisycists) as "saturation".

As, I explained, it prevents em radiation of all wavelengths (not just HF) from escaping

You haven't explained anything, you've just re-stated your incorrect physics. Internal reflection aside, how does the vacuum of space become an insulator of microwave radiation? It's nonsense, repeating it doesn't help.

Firstly, I studied telecommunications physics at Uni, worked at a telecommunications laboratory for seven years. So less of the "real" from an armchair apologist.

Yes, there will be some internal reflection at boundaries, but since radio waves don't conspire to always hit the edge of the atmosphere at more than a critical angle, nothing is 'prevented' from leaving the atmosphere, some of it will just bounce around a bit until it falls below the noise, most of it gets out. To be realistic, most microwave communications equipment of any real power these days are point to point, tight beams with not much power wasted.

If your theory were so, our communications satellites would be heaps of inert junk, unable to see any radio signals from earth. And not just radio... all EM according to you! From the moon, the Earth would be a black disc in space. Holy moly!

Give me a break.

TBYJ: Me too, worked in a telecom lab that is. Two years on waveguide too. I knew the microwave guys but don't remember any discussion of the "total internal reflection" problem. In fact satellites operate around 2.4gbps and I watched Spain beat Italy live the other night, seemed ok to me.

There are three outstanding problems for me with this theory. The first is the notion that all microwave signals hit the TOA at an angle greater than the critical angle, that seems highly improbable. The second is why microwaves out of the whole electromagnetic spectrum have this particular problem, The third is how my satellite TV gets it's signals out of the earths atmosphere.

SandyS mentioned a fourth, which applies to the CO2 theory as well, and that is that it hasn't warmed for 15 years while microwave use has increased exponentially.

I blame Mike Jackson,

"I blame Mike Jackson,"

No I don't must be because I'm in France.

I blame Martin A.

geronimo, I'll do my best to help resolve your confusion.

a. Are you sure you worked in a telecom lab? I ask because you seem not to realise that frequency is measured in gHz, not 'gig bits per second' (gbps).

b. "The third is how my satellite TV gets it's signals out of the earths atmosphere." Signals arrive at your TV *from* a satellite. Your TV is a *receiver*, not a broadcast *transmitter*. A TV aerial installer can explain it in more detail for you if you find this hard to understand.

c. "The second is why microwaves out of the whole electromagnetic spectrum have this particular problem". It is clear that you too have not really studied phisycs, despite having worked in a telecoms lab or this would not be confusing to you. All portions of the em spectrum are trapped, not just microwaves. See how the sky is blue? This is trapped light unable to escape. (some argue that it is *scattered* light but that is a side effect).

I hope this clears it up for you. I realise you probably feel a bit out of your depth discussing such technical matters but that is nothing to be ashamed of.

"I hope this clears it up for you. I realise you probably feel a bit out of your depth discussing such technical matters but that is nothing to be ashamed of."

Your right I shouldn't be mixing it with my betters. Still not sure that you've grasped that a satellite is essentially a relay station, unless, of course the galactic carrier pigeon delivers the programmes to it.

Anyway, goodbye and good cheer with your you theory.

geronimo,

According to µwave, Spain were playing Italy actually inside the satellite, on a huge pitch with gravity inducers and a virtual crowds of holographic supporters. You fool, geronimo!

I bet you feel foolish now.