I removed the statement about Australasian Climate Research being "an organisation apparently based in his bedroom in Kew, Australia". It is certianly worth finding out whether ACR is anything more than a name but in the absence of details best to avoid speculation. --Bob Burton 16:27, 27 Oct 2005 (EDT)
Relocated from article page --Bob Burton 22:50, 6 Dec 2005 (EST) Such an occurence would defy the basic laws of thermodynamics. <--- Not really. If collisional energy couples with vibrational modes, such as might occur in CO2, then CO2 could emit that energy as an infrared photon, and indeed emit more radiation than it absorbs. Someone needs to do a little checking into coupled energy modes of CO2 before making such a blanket dismissal.
"A subsequent letter went further, appealing to Einstein's laws of nuclear physics (only applicable to nuclear reactions) to explain his controversial theories: "The laws of physics . . . allow for energy to be transformed between different modes. Remember Einstein and E = MC2?"." Chjoaygame writing a comment on 25 Feb 2008: As to the presentation of the physics, energy appears in many forms: kinetic, potential for a start. The energy in the mode of the moving and colliding molecules is often transformed into the mode of radiative energy; that is the process that Kininmonth is referring to, I think; it is partly described by Einstein's A and B coefficients for stimulated and spontaneous emission; it is the basis of Planck's Black Body Radiation Law; the process is sometimes called thermalisation. It is not clear, or even plausible (unless I can see the letter that is referred to on the page, and in the event I have not been successful in getting it from the internet), that Kininmonth is being misleading or worse as is the innuendo of the page. Kininmonth would expect the average reader to be unfamiliar with the Einstein A and B coefficients, and unfamiliar with Planck's Black Body Law, but he might expect the average reader to be familiar with the fact that energy can be transformed between different modes as exemplified by E = m c^2; he seems to have just wanted a reader-familiar example of transformation of mode of energy. Do you really think Kininmonth is such a rogue and dill as to make out that the greenhouse effect works like a hydrogen bomb? That is not in his stuff, if you read it.
I removed the par from the article page. I agree that this adds little to the profile that is useful to most readers. --Bob Burton 01:12, 23 June 2008 (EDT)
- A subsequent letter went further, appealing to Einstein's laws of nuclear physics (only applicable to nuclear reactions) to explain his controversial theories: "The laws of physics . . . allow for energy to be transformed between different modes. Remember Einstein and E = MC2?".