Roy Master is not a professional scientist - he is just keen and has done a lot of impressive work on climate change. I think his work is original and, if right, would change the entire view of the way we look at climate change.
He came to me asking me to help improve a video he made on the subject - I responded that his own video does the job well. He then asked me to help with publicity and I have just started to contact the media about his work. I then thought the forum may be interested.
He seeks no monetary gain out of the work.
I welcome all comments on his work. The video is well worth watching.
nice video, and an interesting theory. sorry if i find the background music is a bit creepy.
There is no question that climate change is happening, although the cause of it is the subject of much debate. I've believed for some time that increasing levels of CO2 is a symptom, not the cause of the problem. This film offers an alternative, and to my mind quite a plausible explanation for the cause, although I would have liked to have seen a specific list of references at the end of the film (rather than just a general 'thank you' to NASA and Natural Resources Canada) and some peer review type interviews too. As convincing as the film was, persuading the general populace that magnetic variation is the cause of climate change is another matter, in light of all the brainwashing that is currently going on. And let's not forget the politicians who have a vested interest in the 'man made global warming' story, as a basis for increasing taxation of course.
Regardless of the cause of climate change, what we should not forget is that we, as a species, are consuming the Earth's natural resources at an unsustainable rate, but that's (probably) an entirely different argument.
Philippines. I saw a comparison of the green house gasses from that one volcano to the estimated green house gasses produced by the human race throughout history and the volcano won by a wide margin. It strikes me that some humans are pretty impressed with our importance in the great scheme of things.
I am however a proponent of green technology because it makes economic sense. We have a limited amount of resources and need preserve them for future, more effecient uses. The scare tactics that many scientists and the other groups are using offends me. I know some of them really believe but I think many of them have other motives. There is no doubt we are experiencing global warming BUT, will the wrong response simply leave us vulnerable to the results?
Can we strip Al Gore of his Nobel prize and give it to Roy Master?
If you watched the video you may find that all that makes no difference.
Roy has done a huge amount of work on this - the video is just a glimpse of it.
There is a great deal of inertia and opposition to overcome - new ideas on this are not welcome unless they agree with the concenus.
..................There is a great deal of inertia and opposition to overcome - new ideas on this are not welcome unless they agree with the concenus.
The consensus is driven by the number of people in this field who are employed solely due to their support for Global Warming, and the dollars that this industry makes - a lot of hot air IMHO.
At one time the NorthWest passage was ice free and Greenland was a place farmers could keep animals and grow crops. As this was about 1000 years ago, I doubt that global warming was responsible.
At the moment, I suscribe to the cyclic view of weather and temperature change. When I can access the video I will give it a view and see if it makes me change my mind..
There is no doubt that climate change exists - this video explains that it is caused by the speed of change of the magnetic north pole and its position. The theory explains all aspects of climate change using the same 40,000 years of data that everyone else uses. It explains why one side of the polar ice cap grows whilst another melts, it explains the messing up if the jet stream etc etc.
"Besides the spooky music, how the hell did you listen to the entire thing??? I got thru 5+ mins, and promised to believe him just so I wouldn't have to finish watching."
"It was professional (except for the music), but the man is as dry as sand in the desert"
"It was like watching paint dry!"
"I bailed from that faster than a Latoya Jackson concert."
Me thinks you need to help Roy with a better production of it. It needs to be seen. And, he needs some time in front of the media for Q&A.
I would recommend reading the article. Just looked at the video and it is good but I got more out of the article. I think it is because my brain cells are very old and it takes a few moments for them to absorb and understand the information. The text allows that. The video immerses me in data but I don't have time to turn the data into information.
I agree with Talbot , but also think that Roy Master has a very good and almost rock solid diagnosis , I am with them both, not with all the other scaremongers with all their crap .
At the moment, I subscribe to the cyclic view of weather and temperature change. When I can access the video I will give it a view and see if it makes me change my mind..
The video was done by Roy himself.
To do a decent job would take a month that i do not have time for.
The music, the presentation etc is not important - its the message that is the important thing.
If the video was going to be used in a widespread fashion then fine time could be pit into it. I admire Roy very much for the years of work that he has done. So its comments on the work that are being sought after.
I agree that the message should be the most important thing. To me, it is. To many others it takes a slick presentation like Al Gore did. Shame.
Anywho, I hope he gets some attention from the media some day.
I have not done the numbers as I am not really interested in the argument.
But he has left out the huge amount of energy and CO2 not absorbed because of deforestation in all forms.
1. observe water running out a drain to see the effect of our spinning on our axis and around the sun. imagine this on giant scale on rising & sinking masses of water and air.
3 the wind is pretty impressive. Out side my front door which is almost zero tidal 40cm springs. a sustained blow out in the Atlantic can add another 60cm no problem (a vast amount of water when you think of it, banked up against the West coast of Europe.
The reason I'm no longer interested in whether we did it or not is at this point in time it is probably irelavent IT IS HERE. The merits of being "greener" stand up on there own.
Oil is a finite resource, so should not be wasted.
Polusion, generaly stinks and is bad for our health along with the health of other organisums we share the plant with.
gosh I do enjoy a good rant!!
Last edited by 3Psuite; 30th October 2009 at 08:26 PM.
Since I also have very low bandwidth, I skipped the video and read the article instead. I'm not sure how he jumps from ocean currents to cloud formations, or why he thinks that deep ocean currents were considered to be caused by wind. The Corriolis effect, caused by the rotation of the earth is the source of some of the movements of water, in addition to differences is temperature and salinity of the water. That there could be some effect from the varying rotational speeds of the layers of the earth's geology is not impossible. I see some leaps of logic with no supportingh data save his charts. He doesn't state in the article the sources of all of his data, only some. That there are sources for the data he claims to be unable to access is obvious. NOAA, for instance, has data sets dating much further back than the sources he cites. I'd like to see this submitted to peer review and published in a scientific journal, so that it can be debated among many scientists from many fields. It is interesting.
Not very good engineering to assume from 3 peaks that its evidence of a decaying cycle. I could be just a part of a wave system with more than one element.
By the way it was a good video and I agree his work should be put up against the other theories for scrutiny.
It's interesting how many people are prepared to abandon theories based on scientific peer-reviewed publications for a single web page promoting a new theory without any references.
That's great! Because I have a friend who believes his steam Wankel engine will actually produce more energy than is put in, and he's looking for sponsors to help build a prototype.
I have never been a believer in the standard global warming dogma. This is the first potential explanation that notes the effects of the cyclic variation (a major part of my own belief) and then attempts to provide some explanation (a feat well beyond my feeble intellect).
I am not converted to his concept, but I do believe that this is a phenomena that needs significant further study.
There is serious potential here for this not to be a cause of the weather pattern, but an effect of those changes caused by some other cause. Either way - well worth investigation.