- Joined
- 2 July 2008
- Posts
- 7,102
- Reactions
- 6
I'm afraid basilio that your messiah, who wrote the Warmists bible, and has since become a laughing stock, decended to new lows when he took to the stage in support of one of Australia's greatest pollutor's weird propositions on climate change.
View attachment 58480
Hi Calliope,
where is this cartoon from please.
Many people who would not dream to claim they understand how antibiotics, microprocessors or immunisations work seem happy to wax lyrical on their views on climate change.
A politician or media identity who would be laughed out of office if they said “vaccines don't work" or “I am certain the moon is made of cheese" happily speak equivalent rubbish on climate science, believing their views deserve credit.
I want engineers to build bridges; I want a trained surgeon to operate on hearts and I want some of our decision-makers and commentators to either shut up, or familiarise themselves with climate science well enough to talk sense.
Where to start?
These are things I don’t see (or don’t see enough).
First is still that, even though it is clear greenhouse gas emissions raise the temperature of the Earth, we’ve known this for 50+ years and no reputable atmospheric scientist in the world disputes this, most people think scientists disagree. They’ve been misled by the media, and I’ve been told repeatedly by reporters in the US and Australia that this is due to pressure from management.
Second is the fact that carbon dioxide emissions are effectively irreversible and will stay in the climate system for hundreds of generations is seldom noted. If we decide later that this was a huge mistake there is no going back (practically speaking).
On the political side, I wish the media would note the obvious parallels of the carbon debate with past ones over restricting pollutants (mercury, lead, asbestos, CFCs), where claims that restrictions would be economically catastrophic never came true.
These are things I do see that bug me.
One would be phrases like “action on climate change”. We should be talking about “action on carbon dioxide” — and climate is only one reason (albeit the biggest) that too much of it is dangerous. Nothing we do with respect to any other influence on climate will prevent global warming if CO2 keeps climbing.
The weight of the business, fuel and coal lobby is very much alive in this thread.
The greatest cause for sorrow is the widespread inability of the public discussion to recognise the whole picture.
Much of the political discourse reduces the complexities of climate change to political football (“axe the tax”); much media reporting sees only the hook to today’s passing story; many interest groups want to use climate change to proselytise for their particular get-out-of-jail free card (nuclear power, carbon farming).
All of this misses or trivialises the real, systemic significance of climate change: that humankind is encountering the finitude of our planet, confronting the need to share and protect our endowment from nature, and realising that much will have to change to make this possible.
I can readily understand the concern of the coal, oil and business interests who believe their current interests are threatened by reducing CO2 emissions.
It goes far beyond coal, oil and gas. We're talking about energy here, the one common element to all businesses in either production or consumption.
You'd be hard pressed to find a single business that isn't impacted, either positively or negatively, by this one given that it impacts the very nature of human productivity and thus the conventional economy.
I think the amount of "effort" contained in fossil fuels is lost on people.
But does anyone believe we can continue the current trajectory of energy use and economic activity ?
One of the key reasons for moving to a renewable energy base is the realization that fossils fuels are very finite and will run out (certainly in cost effective terms) within a generation or so.
Watts - Besides moving toward a more accurate temperature record, the best thing about all this hoopla over the USHCN data set is the Polifact story where we have all these experts lined up (including me as the token skeptic) that stated without a doubt that Goddard was wrong and rated the claim “pants of fire”.
They’ll all be eating some crow, as will I, but now that I have Gavin for dinner company, I don’t really mind at all.
When the scientific method is at work, eventually, everybody eats crow. The trick is to be able to eat it and tell people that you are honestly enjoying it, because crow is so popular, it is on the science menu daily.
No developments, no fudging, and no significance.Interesting developments on data fudging -
No developments, no fudging, and no significance.
http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2014/06/noaa-and-temperature-data-it-must-be.html
Red flag, everyone who dissents from the apocalyptic version of the AGW gospel is a denier according to that site. Very unscientific. Doesn't adequately address the points raised, just fallacious arguments.No developments, no fudging, and no significance.
http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2014/06/noaa-and-temperature-data-it-must-be.html
Red flag, everyone who dissents from the apocalyptic version of the AGW gospel is a denier according to that site. Very unscientific. Doesn't adequately address the points raised, just fallacious arguments.
While there is less to it than "right wing" sites are making of it, there is more to it than "left wingers" are prepared to admit.
Dark snow: from the Arctic to the Himalayas, the phenomenon that is accelerating glacier melting
Industrial dust and soil, blown thousands of miles, settle on ice sheets and add to rising sea level threat
Dark snow Greenland
Dark deposits on icefields in Greenland, which absorb more sunlight and lead to faster glacial melting. Photograph: Henrik Egede Lassen/Alpha Film
When American geologist Ulyana Horodyskyj set up a mini weather station at 5,800m on Mount Himlung, on the Nepal-Tibet border, she looked east towards Everest and was shocked. The world's highest glacier, Khumbu, was turning visibly darker as particles of fine dust, blown by fierce winds, settled on the bright, fresh snow. "One-week-old snow was turning black and brown before my eyes," she said.
The problem was even worse on the nearby Ngozumpa glacier, which snakes down from Cho Oyu – the world's sixth highest mountain. There, Horodyskyj found that so much dust had been blown on to the surface that the ability of the ice to reflect sunlight, a process known as albedo, dropped 20% in a single month. The dust that was darkening the brilliant whiteness of the snow was heating up in the strong sun and melting the snow and ice, she said.
The phenomenon of "dark snow" is being recorded from the Himalayas to the Arctic as increasing amounts of dust from bare soil, soot from fires and ultra-fine particles of "black carbon" from industry and diesel engines are being whipped up and deposited sometimes thousands of miles away. The result, say scientists, is a significant dimming of the brightness of the world's snow and icefields, leading to a longer melt season, which in turn creates feedback where more solar heat is absorbed and the melting accelerates.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?