Canola farmers in Saskatchewan and Manitoba are seeing the worst June frosts in recent memory.
In Manitoba, the frost is the worst in memory for its frequency and area covered, said Derwyn Hammond, the province's senior agronomy specialist for the Canola Council.
"Certainly (it's) the worst year I've seen," said Hammond, who has worked for the Canola Council for 15 years.
With deadlines for full canola crop insurance ranging between June 10 and 20 in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, Hammond said he expects most farmers will choose not to reseed.
Cool weather may have actually saved some of the new crop that was at such an early growing stage that it wasn't yet vulnerable to frost, said Doon Pauly, crop specialist for the government of the western province of Alberta.
"It's the equivalent to a frost in the second or third week of May," Pauly said. "That's the bright side."
Whether or not actual weather conditions will rescue us from the global warming police remains to be seen. They continue gearing up to save the earth from the non-existent threat from carbon dioxide which global warmists say is the cause of a "greenhouse effect" and is responsible for rising worldwide temperatures.
'In fact, a pair of German math and physics professors claim the proof is on the other side of the argument. Professor Gerhard Gerlich, who teaches Mathematical and Physics at the Technical University Carolo-Wilhelmina in Germany, and his colleague, ProfessorRalf D. Tscheuschner published a paper that thoroughly discredits the theory. Their paper is entitled, Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics.
'The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that many authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier (1824), Tyndall (1861), and Arrhenius (1896), and which is still supported in global climatology, essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system. According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist. Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology and in a widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation. In this paper the popular conjecture is analyzed and the underlying physical principles are clarifed. By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet...'
For those of us who are not physicists, the professors offer common sense explanations along with their mathematical arguments.
'However, as this heat transmission is less important compared to the convection, nothing remains of the absorption and reflection properties of glass for infrared radiation to explain the physical greenhouse effect. Neither the absorption nor the reflection coefficient of glass for the infrared light is relevant for this explanation of the physical greenhouse effect, but only the movement of air, hindered by the panes of glass.'
In other words, a glass greenhouse traps heat by preventing the air inside from circulating higher into the atmosphere where it cools down. "Greenhouse gases" do nothing to inhibit the circulation of air, nothing to prevent cooling by convection. For the sake of convenience to their argument, the global warmists ignore the effect of convection altogether. What choice do they have, really? It makes their settled science look pretty unsettled.'
For my money I'd say sunspot activity will turn out to be the better predicter of rising or falling global temperatures.
Comments