Global Climate Status Report


Red

Well-Known Member
you seriously believe socialists and statists of your ilk are objectively presenting"young minds" with a range of possibilities?

nah. You are the indoctrinator class of chicken little's.

The Heritage Institute and their "ilk" are reactionaries, history's losers. I wonder who their donors are? I wonder, wonder....

Like my own generation, back in the day, youth will lead the way:

https://climateprotection.org/the-youth-climate-response-when-impatience-is-a-virtue/
 


babe

Well-Known Member
The Heritage Institute and their "ilk" are reactionaries, history's losers. I wonder who their donors are? I wonder, wonder....

Like my own generation, back in the day, youth will lead the way:

https://climateprotection.org/the-youth-climate-response-when-impatience-is-a-virtue/

you're wrong.

The Russian idealists of the early twentieth century were wrong, too.

Marx and a thousand variants of clever progressives have all been wrong.

Facts are not political. Human intelligence is not programmatic or ideological. People who are committed to any fixed idea of the world will miss the point.

History is generally wrong, as well. We are no better today than the first civilizations in terms of morals, intelligence, or wisdom. Sure we have technology.... but we don't know any better what to do with it than the first cave man with the first fire, or the inventor of the wheel. We are lost in our own conceits.

The facts I presented briefly about the relative scales of atmospheric inventories vs oceanic or even land surface temps are in line with continuing ice age/interglacial warm cycles, but all that is still dwarfed potentially by possible cycles in the Sun or even galactic/cosmic environments which we hardly understand.

Far better than going off into disproven political idealism and heavily managed societies and economics, nature has proven repeatedly that individual choices and adaptations to change are the key to survival.

The Brick in the Wall lyrics are the truth in regard to social indoctrination/education ….

Teacher!!!!!!! Leave those kids alone!!!!!!
 

silesian

Well-Known Member
Just the facts, folks.

This is an El Nino year, with an augmented ocean warmth to boot. Tremendous snowpacks almost everywhere, flooding events/hazards/prospects distributed widely across the country.

You can't use one season as isolated evidence, there is too much seasonal variation. It devolves into the "look at this snowball, global warming is fake" argument. Gotta look at the macro trends.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
You can't use one season as isolated evidence, there is too much seasonal variation. It devolves into the "look at this snowball, global warming is fake" argument. Gotta look at the macro trends.

"Global Warming", is a fact. All around the whole world, when the sun rises, it starts getting warming. It's also true locally near campfires and in auto exhaust. I have to take it you're another political perverter of what science was once....well... for a while.... sometime back after Galileo was force to recant his views on geocentrism, because it was politically problematic to think the earth is not the center of the universe because the Bible, in some folks' minds, placed it in the center.

ideas like spontaneous generation were very credibly evident and supported by your "scientific" statists, too. I mean, obviously, if you filled a bottle with cowpoop and covered it and left it in the sun, those flies all came out.... well, as maggots first.... with no help at all.

So the particular issue claimed by globalist advocates using scare tactic to abuse the public mind, is that humun use of combustible fuels not only warms the atmosphere directly, but the CO2 generated helps to keep heat from radiating out into space. I know what the physical chemistry principles involved are, and it's true. CO2 has a higher heat capacity, with modes of molecular vibration and all, than nitrogen or oxygen. H2O also has a significantly higher heat capacity. If you go some near the ocean where there's humidity in the air, it's known to moderate the temperatures when the sun shines, and when the sun goes down.... by capturing and holding heat.... which is nevertheless eventually redistributed if you care to follow the clouds.

Our current political scientists are off their true center of credibilitly when they join or advocate alarmist projections based on a relatively short span of a hundred years or so. It appears we have 1.9 F so far, and very well might spike much higher from here, and it's a fact that CO2 increases, with other "greenhouse gases" like water or hydrocarbons or cow farts must be given a place on the increased atmospheric temp trend. I've never disputed that.

But we are still within the "normal" cycles some studies have shown over interglacial warm time spans that occurred before we burned our fuel.

I don't work for any oil interests, or coal interests.... I recognize that nuclear fuel is available, and that with good responsible engineering and storage, we can produce our electricity less expensively and with far less human labor inputs. Nuclear is the best way forward. But the damn political scientists with their fear mongering media and educational smear machines have done us out of that.

And I think, if we have any kind of policy on energy, we need to conserve our fossil fuels for the next(coming soon) soon ice age.

If you can pull your head outta that commie indoctrination butt that is so dedicated to using whatever tactics it takes to create global fascism with incontestable power all around the world, you would notice that I did not argue the "snowball" proof against warmism. I argued the opposite. I said we have warming going on, and the oceans are getting warmer, but it reflects factors like solar cycles and the putative earth thermostat cycle. When the ice caps melt off, the ocean waters at depth get warmer. The mixing currents change.... you have heard of salt, haven't you? ice melt has little salt.... subtropical oceans where evaporation greatly exceeds precipitation, natural get saltier on the surface. This is one of the factors that drives ocean currents.... the diffusion of salts creates currents locally, but taken as a whole, they help direct ocean currents globally. In El Nino years, the amount of rising cold water taking the place of diffusing warm saltier water, reduces the surface sea temps.... etc etc etc.

Take it all in, and just realize that warm water evaporates faster.... more humidity available to form atmospheric storms.... more snowfall in places like Hudson Bay. That is the first thing that happens in the onset of an ice age. Every ice age we have studied has been preceeded by above normal ocean temps which spike just before it starts....

That is the global fact, Jack.

Then, in my early links, there's this bit about our solar cycles, predicting a substantial reduction in solar flares not just for the current cycles, but for several cycles out.

Warm oceans..... less sun..... more snow. Ice Age.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
Can't argue with that....

Well maybe I could, in certain particulars, but basically human nature is human nature....



https://owlcation.com/stem/massive-solar-flare-1859

Some things in nature are truly well beyond anything we can do about them.... I mean they happen...


But it would be smart of us to make some efforts to be prepared, to ensure survival. And we should do such things on not only local, state, and federal venues, but around the world.

wrt carbon policy, I am mainly concerned about misallocation of scarce resoucrses. Obama did the big pump and dump thing on the coal industry, almost driving them outta business.... but picking up the cheap stock from the panicked sellers, while diverting scads of moolah to Solyndra without real results.

So it is our corruption..... our leaders.... our political systems.... that I think is our worst scare.
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
ideas like spontaneous generation were very credibly evident and supported by your "scientific" statists, too. I mean, obviously, if you filled a bottle with cowpoop and covered it and left it in the sun, those flies all came out.... well, as maggots first.... with no help at all.

Left it uncovered, you mean.If you leave it covered, no maggots appear.

But we are still within the "normal" cycles some studies have shown over interglacial warm time spans that occurred before we burned our fuel.

https://xkcd.com/1732/

Make sure you scroll all the way to the bottom.

Nuclear is the best way forward. But the damn political scientists with their fear mongering media and educational smear machines have done us out of that.

The real issue are NIMBYs spent fuel storage. No one wants to be close to a potential Three Mile Island/Chernobyl, and we don't have great places to store things for thousands of years.
 

silesian

Well-Known Member
"Global Warming", is a fact. All around the whole world, when the sun rises, it starts getting warming. It's also true locally near campfires and in auto exhaust.

Along those lines, last night global warming happened under my electric blanket.

I seriously hope you are joking.
 

silesian

Well-Known Member
I know what the physical chemistry principles involved are,

No you don't
CO2 has a higher heat capacity, with modes of molecular vibration and all, than nitrogen or oxygen. H2O also has a significantly higher heat capacity.

The physical principles are driven by the orbital structure of CO2, causing it to absorb lower frequency light, trapping heat. The differences in heat capacity is not what drives climate change.

This truth is accepted by even the staunchest climate deniers, because it is just simple science.

Seriously, where did you study P Chem? This is pretty basic stuff and you should write to your alma mater for a refund.
 

silesian

Well-Known Member
ideas like spontaneous generation were very credibly evident and supported by your "scientific" statists, too. I mean, obviously, if you filled a bottle with cowpoop and covered it and left it in the sun, those flies all came out.... well, as maggots first.... with no help at all.
their.

Spontaneous generation was the doctrine introduced by Aristotle. It was never a scientific theory. It existed many hundreds of years before the scientific method was conceived. Early scientists called BS on this and it never stood up to scrutiny. But there was no viable competing idea so it remained untested conventional wisdom. And of course it was disproved using the scientific method.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
Left it uncovered, you mean.If you leave it covered, no maggots appear.



https://xkcd.com/1732/

Make sure you scroll all the way to the bottom.



The real issue are NIMBYs spent fuel storage. No one wants to be close to a potential Three Mile Island/Chernobyl, and we don't have great places to store things for thousands of years.


Lets just say "covered" is a part of the logic of spontaneous generation theory. Can't let anything in to change the "spontaneous" phenomena. Of course, you do have to use cowpoop that has already had some flies on it before you put it in the bottle. Then cover it with a fine wire screen or something. I think the maggots grow in pretty oxygen-depleted conditions. But I have not done this experiment scientifically. I have shoveled a lot of poop, and I think you have to cover the stuff with some dirt to stop it. I find the sg apparently going on in pretty deep stuff.
 

Top