Global Climate Status Report




babe

Well-Known Member
STFU, you ignorant fool. No one has said this. But some scientists have said we have already reached a turning point to control climate change. Big difference from your misinformed comment.

Most people are not prepared to examine the basis of any "conclusion" some scientists have opined. Their statements are no better than their information, or judgment about what the information could mean.

Some of the people who call themselves scientists, or who are called "scientists" are capable of making unscientific statements. Don't just assume they are factual.

So far as I've seen, there are a number of synergistic situations in nature that can be a "tipping point".....

The ones I think these "scientists" are referring to include the fact that under our polar icecaps and permafrost, there are huge reservoirs of entrapped methane, which will be relieased when the ice all melts.

And, of course, CO2 concentration is considered by many to be in itself a tipping point.

warming oceans can be considered a tipping point thing, too.

So, there is another way to think about all these "tipping points".....as part of a cycle that will eventually run its course, giving us a period of change that is not going to be permanent.

When the methane and CO2 are converted to stores of carbonate rock.....when the earth goes into a cycle of solar radiation that cools the oceans....
 

babe

Well-Known Member
I think you are a wizard, infection, and extremely funny, but either you are ill-informed or purposely being disingenuous in comparing babe to Red.

Red is your fellow believer, no doubt. I don't really "believe" much, except that I believe there's more to know. Yah, well, I believe there's a God who cares about us. And there's a whole lot of reality we know so little about...... worlds unseen, unknown. Death is not the end of us. Just another beginning.

so anyway, Red is something of a spiritual believer, more than most Materialist dogmatists would consider prudent for the Cause of Progressive Change.

Some of you more purely materialist believers believe you are "funny" when ribbing me, but Red actually cares about humans. Anyway, humor is essential to human sanity, so feel free to apply yourselves to the great task of trying to be funny.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
So, for the record.

I have not been to the Moon, yet. Moon rocks, however, are occasionally blasted away from the Moon and fall to Earth. And Moojn Rocks don't need to be picked up by human hands. We have gizmos that can do that. I don't know how a gizmo can launch itself off the Moon any better than a manned lander, but if a manned lander can do it, so can a gizmo.

Don't work too hard trying to make a case on this subject. My only point in questioning the claims of the US government accomplishments under Tricky Dicky and all his shenanigans is to somehow unsettle the supreme mental laziness or comfort of folks like you who sincerely believe more guvmint is a better way forward.
 
Last edited:

Red

Well-Known Member
I have not been to the Moon, yet. Moon rocks, however, are occasionally blasted away from the Moon and fall to Earth. And Moojn Rocks don't need to be picked up by human hands.

Yes, I've collected meteorites since the early 80's, and I own a few lunar meteorites. At one time they were ridiculously expensive, but they've become much more affordable in just the last few years. But you need to understand that it is also very easy to distinguish lunar meteorites from lunar samples returned to Earth by the Apollo missions. You cannot mistake one for the other, with the right testing. Lunar meteorites will record a terrestrial age, that is how long ago they fell to Earth, whereas the lunar rock samples will not. I'll let you read up on the several other ways the Apollo samples can be distinguished from lunar meteorites. Suffice to say proper testing will distinguish the two.

Well, here, if you do wish to learn a bit more. The Cosmic Ray Exposure(CRE) ages will distinguish lunar meteorites from Apollo samples:

https://www.lpi.usra.edu/books/MESSII/9004.pdf

Note this from the abstract:
Rocks blasted off the Moon and Mars by asteroidal or cometary impacts represent surface areas un- likely to be sampled by manned or automated missions; their CRE ages indicate that they come from some eight different sites on the Moon and also on Mars.

Yes, I concede an unmanned mission could nonetheless collect samples.
 
Last edited:

babe

Well-Known Member
Yes, I've collected meteorites since the early 80's, and I own a few lunar meteorites. At one time they were ridiculously expensive, but they've become much more affordable in just the last few years. But you need to understand that it is also very easy to distinguish lunar meteorites from lunar samples returned to Earth by the Apollo missions. You cannot mistake one for the other, with the right testing. Lunar meteorites will record a terrestrial age, that is how long ago they fell to Earth, whereas the lunar rock samples will not. I'll let you read up on the several other ways the Apollo samples can be distinguished from lunar meteorites. Suffice to say proper testing will distinguish the two.

Well, here, if you do wish to learn a bit more. The Cosmic Ray Exposure(CRE) ages will distinguish lunar meteorites from Apollo samples:

https://www.lpi.usra.edu/books/MESSII/9004.pdf

Note this from the abstract:
Rocks blasted off the Moon and Mars by asteroidal or cometary impacts represent surface areas un- likely to be sampled by manned or automated missions; their CRE ages indicate that they come from some eight different sites on the Moon and also on Mars.

Yes, I concede an unmanned mission could nonetheless collect samples.

meteorites found on Earth will always show their history of fiery descent through our atmosphere.... surfaces oxidized maybe some nitrides also. Inside a capsule shell on Earth descent nothing gets that hot unless the capsule burns first. I imagine we have samples from every landing mission.

thanks for the links.
 

Jonah

Well-Known Member
We know Jonah is.... another hack for the Progressive Agenda.....

Sorry, babe, that’s never been me. Keep trying though, you do seem to really need to label people and put them in tidy little boxes. My theory is that it makes your own calcified view of the world more comforting and manageable.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
Sorry, babe, that’s never been me. Keep trying though, you do seem to really need to label people and put them in tidy little boxes. My theory is that it makes your own calcified view of the world more comforting and manageable.


that window you're looking at........ is not a window...... but a mirror. That's all you see.

I know I don't know much about you, except a few comments .... very few in here.... such as the above offerings..... gleeful little snide insults are not really proof of your intelligence, just proof of your belief in yourself, which you are welcome to indulge in.

But don't think for a second I won't fire back.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
So, a group of scientists have concluded the recent European heat wave was made worse by human caused warming. Some, like myself, trust(I am not a climate scientist; I can only try my hardest to understand the reasoning offered to support the conclusions). Others apparently believe in a broad based conspiracy, in which hundreds of scientists, world wide, are engaged in a political effort to control mankind. Well, again, there is not much I can do to reason with people who believe is such ponderous conspiracies involving so many credentialed researchers acting in concert to fool the human race.

https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEJig5dMkOyXdgyrh7MIiHPQqGQgEKhAIACoHCAow4uzwCjCF3bsCMIrOrwM?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en

I have little patience for anti-conspiracy theorist prognostications.

This is Game's little nut. Conspiracies exist in some sense whenever anyone winks at anyone else with some little inside joke..... all it takes is a few people with a similar world view, or a specific interest to promote.

The present situation in science, in which it is popular, or somehow beneficial, to hop on the climate change political hackwagon, is nothing more than lazy convenience for most "believers", whose only common trait might be credulousity. Expert credulousity though it may be.

I think things are changing. I believe, despite some concerns about data collection and management, that our planetary atmosphere is warming, as most of the hackwagon crowd believes. I just don't think it is such a crisis that would justify doing all the wrong things politically all around the world.

You can't have a valid objection to people who notice what amounts to, essentially, a sociological or educational "consensus" to just characterize the valid observation as something it is not. There is not a /// need not be any//// kind of "vast rightwing conspiracy" or even "vast leftwing conspiracy" where your opponents gather in the dark of night by the millions to decide what tricks to pull politically in this world.

All you need is to get the view pushed by some bought-and-paid-for "community organizer groups". Well, maybe a few thousand like-minded believers pushing the cause. But a bunch of interested bureaucrats and do-gooder outfits can really get it cooking. Especially if someone with a huge wad of cash is backing a set of such groups. George Soros..... Bill Gates.....Oprah..... a few media owners....like this set....

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/may/31/new-york-billionaire-philanthropists


Nowadays, it's not just Hillary complaining about conspiracies to oppose her husband.... it's several prominent news organizations..... seeing Trump as some kind of threat to democracy.

yah, Trump might be an idiot. Certainly he is not on the CFR "good list". And he might be making deals with all kinds of governments around the world. But he has no organization like the progressives have had for over a hundred and fifty years with a distinct world view to push. He's just himself, being himself. And a lot of people are looking for something besides what we have had.....

what he has done, or tried to do, is more in the line of sticking up for what many Americans want, which is very different from a lot of politicians of the "Establishment" sort. I think he came up with his ideas by seeing a trend and deciding to ride it....a fairly significant number of people who want things to be done differently. Somehow.... Anyhow.

But so far I haven't seen how Trumpism is going to last longer than Trump.
 
Last edited:

babe

Well-Known Member
Trump might not be a climate expert. His 'base" probably isn't an elite set of enlightened believers or disbelievers in climate science. I think he sees a lot of people who don't want climate change issues to be used politically to change our political and economic world towards socialist ideals and increased government perogatives which are seen to be upsetting or threatening to our liberties.... Trump sees enogh people dissatisfied with this political hijacking of science, and our government, to think it is something good for him to use politcally......

I don't think Trump believes or disbelieves...... I think he sees it as a wrong political cause that people really don't want.

I think climate change is likely real..... maybe not just due to CO2.

Maybe because of natural climate cycles including, importantly, a cycle of geophysical nuclear trends within the Earth itself.

An increase in heat flux capable of raising ocean temps a few degrees, especially at depth, is capable of much more impact than atmospheric CO2 increases due to human use of fossil fuels....

So why is it important for crusaders for political change, to believe we must all accept global warming, and accept the proposed political change that is being pushed as justified by climate change?

Looks like property/wealth redistribution, socialism. You can justify anything you want with any sort of "problem" that needs to be fixed, if only you can sell the program politically. Guvmint can fix what needs fixin'.....

nah. I think guvmint never fixes anything. Just creates dependency and eliminates people's choices.....

I think it is really, really stupid to make climate change about a politcal cause, while not caring to get the whole story, the whole facts.... and actually do something to cope with what is happening.

Wrong-headed is hardly any kind of beneficial or enlightened way to deal with real problems.....
 
Last edited:

One Brow

Well-Known Member
If only I had a private (co2 spewing) jet to fly to one of these climate change summits, making that 115 jets total.. maybe I would be more informed.

If only you had access to Google, and the capability to type in the criteria for a search.
 

Jonah

Well-Known Member
that window you're looking at........ is not a window...... but a mirror. That's all you see.

I know I don't know much about you, except a few comments .... very few in here.... such as the above offerings..... gleeful little snide insults are not really proof of your intelligence, just proof of your belief in yourself, which you are welcome to indulge in.

But don't think for a second I won't fire back.
Out of nowhere you call me a hack for an agenda I’ve never advocated here or anywhere else and I’m the one that’s insulting? Maybe we could limit our future interaction to when there’s something substantive that can be directly referenced? That should make it really easy to avoid each other and any repetition of this nonsense.
 

Top