Resisting Climate Hysteria

[noco]

The consequences of Global Warming.

In the Northern Hemisphere the rapid increase in temperatures is causing millions of square klms of permafrost to melt. The amount of stored methane and CO2 in the permafrost is almost double the current CO2 in the atmosphere.

Release of Carbon from Melting Permafrost Could Trigger Rapid Warming

Posted by Tim Profeta of Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University on September 1, 2016
(0)
More »

A study published last week in Nature Geoscience provides the first measurements of greenhouse gases from permafrost under Arctic lakes in Alaska, Siberia, and Canada. Although the research reveals that only a small amount of old carbon has been released in the past 60 years, it also suggests that much more could be released as the Arctic warms up faster than any other place on Earth.

“It’s a lit fuse, but the length of that fuse is very long,” said lead author Katey Walter Anthony of the University of Alaska. “According to the model projections, we’re getting ready for the part where it starts to explode. But it hasn’t happened yet.”

The scientists determined that the permafrost-carbon feedback is thus far small by looking at aerial photographs and using radiocarbon dating to determine the age of methane emitted from the Arctic lakes that are expanding to consume and thaw terrestrial permafrost. As that permafrost melts and decomposes, it releases ancient carbon as carbon dioxide and methane. Analysis of 113 radiocarbon dating measurements and 289 soil organic carbon measurements showed that approximately 0.2 to 2.5 petagrams of permafrost carbon was released as methane and carbon dioxide in the past six decades.

The billions of tons of carbon stored in permafrost are approximately double the amount currently in the atmosphere. Many researchers are concerned that emission of that stored carbon will contribute to warming that then contributes to permafrost thawing in an accelerating feedback loop.

http://voices.nationalgeographic.co...lting-permafrost-could-trigger-rapid-warming/

I tried to explain to you it has all to do with the Sun and the 70 year climate change cycle and have given you links to follow but you are still very narrow minded about it all and just cannot accept to historical information.

You instead prefer to name calling to ridicule not my opinion but that of history in an attempt to silence any opposition.

What are you afraid of?....Being defeated with with your Green philosophy?......

Can you not have sensible discussion with the name calling or do you think that will help your cause?

 

[luutzu]

I tried to explain to you it has all to do with the Sun and the 70 year climate change cycle and have given you links to follow but you are still very narrow minded about it all and just cannot accept to historical information.

You instead prefer to name calling to ridicule not my opinion but that of history in an attempt to silence any opposition.

What are you afraid of?....Being defeated with with your Green philosophy?......

Can you not have sensible discussion with the name calling or do you think that will help your cause?

CC isn't just some intellectual exercise noco. It affects real people in real ways. Literally a matter of life and death for tens of millions - if not the survival of our own species.

That's no exaggeration.

If those scientists, the type that develop drugs and engineer and cure illnesses and develop systems that predict cyclones and the weather... if there's a chance that they're right... might want to take it seriously.

So maybe you too ought to get "rude" and put some anger behind how some people are too laid back about this.

 

[wayneL]

"And SuperWayne burst his chains with one mighty leap taking his pal Noco by his side"

You don't touch base with reality much these days do you boys ? You just serve up the same non sequiturs that disregard what is actually happening to the world we live in as a result of human created global warming.
Wayne catch cry is " the politicization of climate science." Somehow when all the meteorologists around the world record steeply increasing temperatures in the last 3 years on top of previous increases in the past 40 years that's "politicization of climate science".

When the inevitable social consequences of such changes in our climate are discussed by senior white house defence personnel that is just "the politicization of climate science."

When glaciologists document how rapidly ice shelfs, and glaciers are collapsing and the consequences of these events the same catchcry "the politicization of climate science."

When earth scientists note the rapid melting of frozen arctic areas in Siberia and Canada and the release of millions of tons of methane - again "the politicization of climate science."

Seems to just be a convoluted way of say "I don't believe any of that xhit is happening

What is your main source of income sir?

 

[Logique]

I'm all for hyperbole to win a an argument, but that chestnut is a pretty much over hyped and denial arguments deliberately pernicious. It also lacks a time stamp from both camps IMO.
he actually said:
The question really is have any deniers actually conferred with the farmers to find out if he's on track and what a reasonable time frame is when the framer's dams don't fill and their river streams don't fill as a normal event either?
Dams are not just state owned mega structures, most are on farming properties for irrigation, cattle, sheep, etc.

That's historical revisionism, and just plain false. I can provide the attributions. And the term 'Denier' is pure propaganda, with it's Holocaust overtones, most commonly used to silence dissent.

I don't recall too much disagreement from the CAGW crowd with the high priest's pronouncements of the time.

Now it's 'One Tim Flannery doth not a climate change argument maketh.' You've been benched Tim, along with Michael Mann and his hockey stick.

 

[Knobby22]

Back to the real news.
Allianz is officially fleeing Nth Queensland. they made an assessment a while back that the weather was only going to get worse and have been easing out since 2003. They look smart now as Suncorp (until recently a climate change doubter with a denier at the helm) and IAG takes another huge hit. The good thing is that these companies now plan to increase premiums greatly holding up their share prices.
http://www.insurancenews.com.au/local/allianz-flees-north-queensland-personal-lines-market

I have always avoided Suncorp as they were a lemming company with poor risk control and awful results but I think there may be an opportunity coming up with their more enlightened management.

 

[Tisme]

That's historical revisionism, and just plain false. I can provide the attributions. And the term 'Denier' is pure propaganda, with it's Holocaust overtones, most commonly used to silence dissent.

I don't recall too much disagreement from the CAGW crowd with the high priest's pronouncements of the time.

Now it's 'One Tim Flannery doth not a climate change argument maketh.' You've been benched Tim, along with Michael Mann and his hockey stick.

What has been revised? I just posted a transcript and suggested both bookends (believers and deniers) of failing to apply appropriate vectors to the argument.

There is no corollary between my post and Nazism and surely a giant PC segue too far into the ridiculous zone. I'm assuming you flew into a blind rage and had a brain fart on that one because it's really entering that historical no go zone of discussion boards.

 

[basilio]

What is your main source of income sir?

My business - not yours and Off topic

 

[basilio]

I must admit, to me most of the hysteria seems to come from people trying to assert climate change is not a taxing problem, as it:

1. does not exist or;
2. does not present a danger or;
3. is just a conspiracy theory dreamed up by sheeple scientists and socialists;
4. etc

I tend to think the determined few antagonists are more like "why wasn't I told" Dorry Evans from Number 96, with the rest of us feeling like an exasperated Herb or at best Flo Patterson.

Always interesting to reflect on previous comments. Very apposite

 

[wayneL]

My business - not yours and Off topic

As one who acuuses others (usually inaccurately) of vested interests, It could very well be on topic, if you have a vested interest in inflating alarmism.

What do you have to hide?

 

[luutzu]

As one who acuuses others (usually inaccurately) of vested interests, It could very well be on topic, if you have a vested interest in inflating alarmism.

What do you have to hide?

I think we all have a vested interest in stopping climate change Sifu.

What with wanting the kids and grand kids to stay alive and stuff.

 

[Logique]

I think we all have a vested interest in stopping climate change Sifu.
What with wanting the kids and grand kids to stay alive and stuff.

The climate has always changed and always will. I have no interest, vested or otherwise, in trying to prevent this. WayneL. simply asks Basilio to make a commitment in similar terms, either way.

As Wayne says, what does Basilio have to hide?

With the kids staying alive, it will be a lot harder with the (unnecessary) runaway costs of electricity to cope with, and less available jobs because industry has been driven offshore in search of affordable energy.

 

[luutzu]

The climate has always changed and always will. I have no interest, vested or otherwise, in trying to prevent this. WayneL. simply asks Basilio to make a commitment in similar terms, either way.

As Wayne says, what does Basilio have to hide?

With the kids staying alive, it will be a lot harder with the (unnecessary) runaway costs of electricity to cope with, and less available jobs because industry has been driven offshore in search of affordable energy.

It's not about "hiding" something. It's about things being private and none of other people's business.

The Sun and the Wind are free, right?

The cost of setting up a solar or wind farm is a whole lot less than the typical coal or nuclear powered station. And that doesn't include the non-existence costs to the environment and people's health costs. Doesn't include the cost to mine, clean, transport and waste disposal of the fuel etc.

So cost wise, it's a no-brainer.

Job wise... new tech, new construction projects mean new jobs, new R&D; mean less automation (for the time being).

I'm pretty sure manufacturing weren't shipped offshore due to high cost of electricity. I mean those jobs were gone long before the power utilities were privatised

 

[noco]

It's not about "hiding" something. It's about things being private and none of other people's business.

The Sun and the Wind are free, right?

The cost of setting up a solar or wind farm is a whole lot less than the typical coal or nuclear powered station. And that doesn't include the non-existence costs to the environment and people's health costs. Doesn't include the cost to mine, clean, transport and waste disposal of the fuel etc.

So cost wise, it's a no-brainer.

Job wise... new tech, new construction projects mean new jobs, new R&D; mean less automation (for the time being).

I'm pretty sure manufacturing weren't shipped offshore due to high cost of electricity. I mean those jobs were gone long before the power utilities were privatised

Wind and solar have been heavily subsidized......It is only 15% efficient compared to 35% coal fired power stations which last up to 60 years...Coal is also cheap and plentiful.

The life of solar panels and wind turbines have a life span of some 25 years at which time will have to be replaced at probably double the cost.

Battery storage is still in its infancy and most likely will be expensive and have to be replaced every 7 to 10 years.

Finally I should ask you the question why have electricity prices risen so fast and so high in South Australia....The cost of power in SA is creating a headache for business.

 

[wayneL]

I think we all have a vested interest in stopping climate change Sifu.

What with wanting the kids and grand kids to stay alive and stuff.

How naive you are Grasshopper.

Nobody can stop climate change, because... climate changes, irrespective of human activities.

Especially, climate change cannot be changed by posting copious amounts Of Guardian articles, or specious mendacities from skepical science blog, or Quoting fudged and discredited claims of consensus.

Even if there is as much of an anthropomorphic influense as basilio claims, Australia's efforts are an exercise in futility work zero effect.

In fact basilio has no interest in mitigating climate change, basilio is interested only in ramping alarmism, because I suspect it profits him to do so. This is evident by his focus on alarmism in this thread and disregard for other factors I have mentioned.

What had basilio got to lose? We don't know his real name, or where he lives... what harm is there in disclosing his vested interest?

BTW I'm happy to disclose my full name and business activities.

 

[luutzu]

Wind and solar have been heavily subsidized......It is only 15% efficient compared to 35% coal fired power stations which last up to 60 years...Coal is also cheap and plentiful.

The life of solar panels and wind turbines have a life span of some 25 years at which time will have to be replaced at probably double the cost.

Battery storage is still in its infancy and most likely will be expensive and have to be replaced every 7 to 10 years.

Finally I should ask you the question why have electricity prices risen so fast and so high in South Australia....The cost of power in SA is creating a headache for business.

I haven't looked into SA but my guess is it's high because it's been privatised.

Fund more solar and wind projects then watch its costs drop and efficiency gained and accelerate.

And all infrastructure projects are subsidized anyway.

Costs are often counted as it occur, and occur on the project and development. But if we take in the actually costs... say the costs people around the coal power plant paid with their illness, cancer, shortened lifespan; count the costs to those living around oil and gas refineries...

and let's assume that fossil fuel does contribute to global warming, increasing the frequency and intensity of cyclones, droughts and floods. What's the costs to a community when a cyclone that might otherwise not be so extreme or would not happen, happened?

 

[luutzu]

How naive you are Grasshopper.

Nobody can stop climate change, because... climate changes, irrespective of human activities.

Especially, climate change cannot be changed by posting copious amounts Of Guardian articles, or specious mendacities from skepical science blog, or Quoting fudged and discredited claims of consensus.

Even if there is as much of an anthropomorphic influense as basilio claims, Australia's efforts are an exercise in futility work zero effect.

In fact basilio has no interest in mitigating climate change, basilio is interested only in ramping alarmism, because I suspect it profits him to do so. This is evident by his focus on alarmism in this thread and disregard for other factors I have mentioned.

What had basilio got to lose? We don't know his real name, or where he lives... what harm is there in disclosing his vested interest?

BTW I'm happy to disclose my full name and business activities.

What's in your pr0n collection Sifu?

We're sure you got nothing to hide. I'm sure it's all legal. So give us a screenshot, screen capture.

So let say Basillo invest in some green tech company... his point about CC is self-interested?


Like I was saying a while back, remember that couple of holes in the Ozone layer? Some idiot scientific community figured it's caused by the release of CFC or whatever gas it was in hairspray and refridgerants.

Laws were passed to ban that gas. Those holes are getting smaller and are expected to heal in another decade. Less White people will die of skin cancer now.

See how human activities does impact the world around it? See how scientists tend to know their area of expertise. See how following their advice does turn the tide? See how if it were to kill more White people than the brown and black folks it tend to be fix in a real hurry?

You think I'm kidding about the last point.

Don't be so naive Sifu.

 

[wayneL]

Happy to share my pr0n collection on the appropriate forum Grasshopper, if you'd like to start a thread on that. However as it does not play to my moderate stance on CC, it is not relevant.

I'm more likely to watch shoe making pr0n to be honest, this is me on a a two heat concave front, as a matter of disclosure.

 

[basilio]

As one who acuuses others (usually inaccurately) of vested interests, It could very well be on topic, if you have a vested interest in inflating alarmism.

What do you have to hide?

Sussed out. 9 years and 658,912 posts on the issues surrounding human caused CC and Wayne has worked out I have an interest in the outcome.

Of course I do and it’s priceless. The short story as Luutzu accurately notes are my children and grandchildren. But on reflection that is far too short. If we cook , we all cook. Us, my kids, Waynes kids Luutzu children. If we somehow address the issues we all have a better chance of surviving and thriving. So if I want to see action taken that averts this disaster it’s for everyones’ sake.

If I or my children ever want to see the Great Barrier Reef in all it’s glory there is precious little time. In fact the realist in me would say "see it before it goes". And unfortunately that is probably the case for thousands of ecosytems that are under CC threat. Of course when whole ecosytems collapse let’s not pretend humans will survive in some man made bubble. Mind you when the merde does hit the fan there will no doubt be enclaves for the superrich to survive. At least for a few years.

And through all this Wayne somehow suspects I have some driving economic interest that has driven my posts on this forum and work elsewhere. By the same token Wayne must also believe that the scientific community that has researched, modelled and examined CC and its effects are similarly economically driven – and to be dismissed in the same light.

My financial interests are meagre. On principle I won’t “disclose” them because frankly they add absolutely nothing to the discussion. In the context of CC discussion my interest is trying to leave a world in a state can support life as we know it. I can’t eat money. I can’t breathe it. The essentials that sustain life are not found on the stock exchange.

 

[Ves]

Appeals to vested interests, conflicts of interests, motives etc. are all Ad Hominem (Circumstantial) fallacies.

Given that the foundation of science is based upon the concept of falsifiability it says more about the person making the types of appeals listed above than it does the person for whom these are being made about.

 

[Knobby22]

Appeals to vested interests, conflicts of interests, motives etc. are all Ad Hominem (Circumstantial) fallacies.

Given that the foundation of science is based upon the concept of falsifiability it says more about the person making the types of appeals listed above than it does the person for whom these are being made about.

You make it sound like a bad thing. it is a way from differentiating science from pseudo science.

According to Popper, Falsifiability, particularly testability, is an important concept in science and the philosophy of science. Popper concluded that a hypothesis or theory is "scientific" only if it is, among other things, falsifiable. Therefore, he sees Falsifiability as a necessary (but not sufficient) criterion for scientific ideas. Scientific theories for Popper therefore comprised all those theories that fit the scientific status of a theory in its Falsifiability, refutability or testability.

https://www.ukessays.com/essays/phi...oncept-of-falsifiability-philosophy-essay.php