You are correct - there are issues with Nikolov's ideas (I was actually referencing Jelbring, but some of the ideas are similar), specifically, now can the equilibrium temperature of a black body be different with an atmosphere without GHGs? I don't think it can, but that doesn't mean that the tiny amount of CO2 is going to make up all the difference, and I think it's a good starting point to describe why the "radiative forcing" theory is clearly wrong.

There is a better discussion at (Oh Nos! DENIERS site) Watt's blog, and he has the same problem with those theories himself.

Not sure what you're trying to assert here. There is nothing in the "Maxwell gravito-thermal mass/gravity/pressure theory" that explains global warming - it's used to calculate the average global temperature of a planetary body, and does so very accurately without using "radiative forcing" as a feedback mechanism. That pretty much disproves radiative forcing, since the Maxwell theory is so accurate without it.

I don't know what your context is, here, but it seems to have changed. You originally said "should be exactly the same temperature all day and all year around at any place on Earth's surface." How is that not "constant". Of course temperature changes, because the climate is chaotic. But we're looking for a global average temperature over a long term. There is no model anywhere that will tell you with any accuracy the surface temperature at any given time. The best we have is using current observations to predict temperature within a few degrees 10 days to 2 weeks out.

Because you said so. Got it.

I'll remember who NOT to ask for scientific evidence in the future.

Incorrect. You need to determine the Earth's base equilibrium temperature with the Sun, which was unknown in the 1970's. We now have satellite observations that give is that (Te = 255K). They didn't have that in 1976, so they used the known surface temperature. But it works just the same with more precise measurements.

Neither can any other theory, certainly not the "radiative forcing" theories that drive the climate change alarmism. The formula DOES, however, when combined with satellite observations, DISPROVES "radiative forcing", because it would result in temperatures much higher than we have today. So it cannot be true.

In this case, not an opaque computer model with unspecified parameters and assumptions as input, but instead a clear mathematical model that can easily be tested.

Look again, that's exactly the opposite of what the model does.

dT/dh = -g/Cp

where

dT = change in temperature
dh = change in altitude
g = gravitational acceleration constant
Cp = heat capacity at constant pressure

"Denialist"? Is that the term you CAGW alarmists are using these days to describe "science"? Pretty clever, considering you have completely destroyed the original meaning of the word science into something that is (1) Settled (2) Reported by political committees, and (3) Arrived at by "consensus".

You, sir, are a damn liar. Contrary to your ridiculous assertion, the US Standard Atmosphere Model and satellite and other observations prove Maxwell's Mass/Gravity/Pressure theory of the 'Greenhouse Effect' is, in fact, correct.

If you've seen some claim that the dT/dh = -g/Cp equation has been "disproven", I'd love to see it. Don't bother with non-peer-reviewed blog posts, either.

In fact, they do:

Oh, of course. We should throw out Relativity, too, it's even older.

The 1976 US Standard Atmosphere document and database (which still remains the gold standard today and has not changed despite 39 years of greenhouse gas emissions) is an absolute goldmine of detailed information on the physical derivation of the standard atmospheric model and confirmatory observations, collected from satellite data that was not even available when Maxwell's equations were first derived. It provides overwhelming physical proof and overwhelming observational evidence that the Maxwell gravito-thermal mass/gravity/pressure theory of the 33C "greenhouse effect" is correct, and would necessarily falsify any significant "radiative forcing from greenhouse gases" affecting the lapse rates or various atmospheric temperature gradients, and thus as well negate the theory of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. Only one of these two competing greenhouse theories can account for the 33C greenhouse effect, since if both were true, the Earth would be an additional 33C warmer than present.

In this case, yea, it is. If you're a descent PM, when you start seeing that kind of stuff cropping up, you do two things, simultaneously. 1 - you start pointing out the issues, in many ways and using as many analogies you can think of, to the project sponsors, in hopes of righting the ship. AND 2 - start making contacts and keeping your resume up to date. It's fix or exit time. Real PMs don't have much power, but the good ones can come into any situation and improve things. Whether they can actually make enough difference in a troubled project depends very much on the PM and the organization. Both.

Actually, being in the IT field with an aptitude for management would make him the ideal candidate for a PMI PMP (Project Manager Professional) certification. You need to know some stuff about IT, like the effort it takes for development, the kinds of tools and system available, the tradeoffs between budget, time, and quality, etc. Lots of companies (and governments) look for PMP certifications for project manager positions. And since the OP doesn't particularly like coding, he can spend his whole day in meetings, compiling reports, evaluating build progress, and writing memos. No coding required.

Pays really well, too.

Of course Europe is fascist, and the US is moving in that direction very quickly. Fascism is simply a method of implementing totalitarianism - one that involves partnerships between government and big business. When the banks decide how governments will spend their money, and governments decide how and what companies produce, that's fascism, and Europe is steeped in it.

Of course extreme right and extreme left (as described in most outlets these days) are both paths to totalitarianism. Europe has simply chosen the far-left form of totalitarianism. There are very few places in the world moving away from totalitarianism these days - and none are in Europe or North America.

It only seems complicated because both sides use the same tactics: Each has a group of followers that are convinced the [left / right] is the only ideas that help the common people, and they use those followers to promote ideas that end up, once implemented to always be bad for the common people and provide more power and money to the elites in control. It's all a game to them, and they each have one color of pawns or another.

You don't have a single right wing outlet in Europe. Even the most right leaning is way into the political left in the US. You've got so used to extreme left as central, you cannot see you're living in a fascist state.

Yes, the US, once the last, best hope for freedom and liberty, is moving further to the left where all the countries that have already lost are now positioned. Central Banks (rah rah), central control (yippee ECB), and soul-crushing austerity rules while the ECB spends 1.6 Billion Euros (that's Billion with a "B") on its luxurious building, built for kings. Of course, they are the new kings and priests all rolled into one, while the obedient zombies of Europe cheer on their own enslavement.

That's great - let's bring it to the US. It's working very well. The only thing stopping Agenda 21 from wresting control of all property from the US citizens and handing it to the elitists are those that know enough history to recognize the New World Order being promoted by HW Bush and Obama is no different from the serfdom and slavery of the old world that founding of the US tried to avoid in the New World. Old habits die hard, though, and the descendents of the old dictators want their Divine Right of Kings back, but with a new name now because they have created new gods to replace the old, and those gods demand sacrifice from the people. And glory for the New Priests.