©MeNow
The Modern witchcraft of the Climate change Hustle.
No pledges will be met, it's just lips service of the dangling carrot to extract you $s/£s that will always move forward.
To stop normal folks using up the richness's future resource.
It's one way of reducing the real hockey stick of population that is out of their control.
At the same time Nuclear Fusion in a similar vein is unlikely ever to be achieved with more output than input.
The new Trojan Horse of this Virtue Signalling movement has others agendas to fool masses into a UN-achievable clean Utopian future.
The first order causes of Climate are the Sun and Earth's orbit around it; CO2 is a good green gas for photosynthesis viz. plant food and is unfairly blamed when no noises about larger GHGs such as H2O N2O, but some on CH4 (that signal is being alarmed however guess why!?)
·
There is no such thing as one global
absolute sea level. There is only local sea level.
·
Pacific atolls adapt to sea level rise
naturally as they have been doing for millennia.
·
Corals evolved in the Cambrian Era with
atmospheric CO2 20 times higher than at present.
·
Only storm surges, earthquakes and tsunamis
can overrun atolls, not sea levels.
·
The notion that we can measure any sort of
sea level to fractions of a millimetre from satellites at 200 miles is a myth.
·
In the geological record, temperature rises
always precedes CO2 rises.
·
2016 was the warmest year (“evah”). Only if
you look at the extremely sparse ground stations AND believe a rise of 0.04°C is statistically significant. The value of 0.04°C is smaller than the margin of error.
·
Ground stations equate to one thermometer
estimating the temperature of an area the size of Spain and half of those
stations cover less than 5% of the Earth’s surface. The rest is accounted for
by infilling and interpolation (guessing). Representative? No. The Satellite
record is ignored as it only goes back to 1979. Pity, as it is effectively uses
127,033,686 thermometers which cover 99% of the Earth’s surface (85N to 85S).
That is comparable to having a thermometer every 2km in every direction. Radiosondes
(balloons) give similar results to the satellite record but are strangely
ignored by NASA
·
NASA’s NOAA has lowered historical
temperatures (1930’s, 1940’s) to make the present appear warmer. This is well
documented. NOAA says it is merely applying instrument “correction factors”.
·
CO2 appears to
have been steadily rising for over a 100 years and yet temperatures went UP
from 1910 to 1940, then DOWN from 1940 to 1977 (prompting fears of a little ice
age) then UP between 1978 to 1998 and they have been FLAT since then. So CO2 does not correlate at all with the temperature record at sub-millennial
time scales.
·
The atmosphere cannot warm until the
underlying surface warms first (the atmosphere is transparent to solar
radiation).
·
The temperature of the lower atmosphere is
largely determined by the temperature of the oceans, not land.
·
Q: What is the evidence for man-made global
warming caused by CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels? A: None
whatsoever. The whole edifice is built on the theory that CO2 is a radiative
gas which absorbs heat radiated from the Earth’s surface which has been heated
by sunlight. We have no way of knowing what actually happens in our coupled
non-linear chaotic atmosphere, or how much heat is lost to space, or trapped by
clouds.
·
We do not know accurately what Nature’s
contribution is to atmospheric CO2 levels, but best estimates are that it contributes about 97% of CO2 in the atmosphere from ocean outgassing (when oceans are warm), and
from soil, insects, etc. CAGW proponents say that the Earth appears to prefer
Man’s CO2 to heat the atmosphere, rather than her own.
·
Leonardo de Caprio said “the oceans will
boil!” He needs to be told that it would take 75 watt-years per square metre to
evaporate one cubic meter of seawater per year.
·
It is near impossible for equatorial
regions to get much hotter as the negative feedback effects of ocean
evaporation, high water vapour levels and tropical thunderstorms set a
practical upper limit.
·
Atmospheric CO2 levels are still dangerously low. Twelve thousand years ago it
was 180ppm – worryingly close to 150ppm when plant life effectively shuts down
– and with it most life on Earth. Ideally it should be 1000ppm to 1500ppm – the figure that growers use in poly greenhouses.
·
The Earth is visibly greening as seen by
satellites as CO2 continues to rise.
·
CO2 has been
higher (in fact much higher) than today for over 90% of Earth’s history.
·
No ice at the poles will be a good thing as
it won’t affect sea level (as it is ice on/in water) and the increased arable
land can feed a growing world population.
·
It is only the Greenland and Antarctic
glaciers melt that could affect sea levels – and they aren’t going anywhere
soon.
·
The Earth was warmed by 0.8 °C in the last 160 years. Is that a problem?
·
The oceans are not, never have been, or
will ever be acidic. They have always been profoundly alkaline (pH 8.1 to 8.4).
·
The oceans are buffered by alkali rock. The only way the oceans will get acidic is if the Earth runs out of rocks. (Hint: see Carbon cycle and weathering).
·
At the height of the Paleocene-Eocene, 55 million years ago, there was no ice at the poles and the temperature of sea water at the North Pole would have been 22°C and the deep oceans 12°C. Today
they are 0°C and 2°C respectively.
·
During the Mesozoic, a period lasting over 180 million years, Earth’s
average temperature was 8°C to 12°C higher than today, CO2 was more than ten times higher than now, yet life flourished pole to pole, and a tipping point was never reached.
·
The Medieval Warm Period (1000CE→1300CE) and Little Ice Age (1600CE→1800CE) have been confirmed as worldwide based on drilling that show the types of pollen from plants that are hardier during cold periods and plants that live when it is warmer
·
Due to the high density of the oceans, a mere two metres depth of water can contain the entire heat of the atmosphere above.
·
Real pollutants are Carbon monoxide(CO), lead(Pb), ozone(O3), particulate matter from diesels, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and sulphur dioxide (SO2), not CO2.
·
“Tipping Points” are rare in Nature as stable systems are dominated by negative feedbacks, otherwise we would have roasted or frozen millennia ago.
·
Polar bears do 80% of their feeding during the ringed seals breeding period during the spring. The reduction of sea ice during the summer has little bearing on the health of polar bears.
·
Polar bear numbers are high in 90% of all monitored groups.
·
Looking at evidence of past cycles the Earth is entering a general cooling trend (modulated by the 60 year and other solar periodicities) that will last until the depths of a future Little Ice Age at about 2650CE, followed by a 350 +/- year warming to another millennial peak at about 3000CE.
·
The climate models on which the entire Global Warming delusion rests are built without regard to the natural 60 year and more importantly 1000 year periodicities so obvious in the temperature record.
·
Global temperatures have remained remarkably stable for the last 800,000 years – about 3 degrees either side of a long running mean.
·
Arctic sea ice is sinusoidal in nature and follows closely the 30-year Pacific Decadal Oscillation and the Atlantic Meridional Oscillation warm/cool cycles.
·
The “97% of climate scientists believe in Human caused global warming” has been debunked as a statistical sleight of hand (see McKitrick report). The actual figure is 0.3%.
· There has been no increase of floods, hurricanes or droughts over the last century despite what is reported in the media.
·
A warmer world will mean less extreme weather events as the atmospheric pressure differential between equatorial and polar regions will reduce.
·
Skeptics of Anthropogenic Global Warming have been called “anti-Science” by the warmists, but the truth is quite the opposite as the warmists do not provide any evidence and are not willing to debate it, that human-caused CO2 has any measurable effect on climate. Instead it is accepted as “truth” or “settled
Science”.
·
Never in the history of Science has any topic being “settled”. The scientific method is built on scepticism. It is how hypotheses get refined, tweaked or discarded if it is found to have little supporting evidence.
·
The scientific method states that if your hypothesis (CO2 induced warming) doesn’t match observations or experiment (past temperatures) then your hypothesis is WRONG, period.
·
The warmists often fall back to: “if so many scientists say it is true, then the odds are that it is”, but as the
late, great Richard Feynman once said, again on the scientific method: “It doesn’t matter how clever you are, or how many people said it, if your hypothesis doesn’t match observation or experiment, then it is WRONG.”
·
Einstein once said: “No amount of experimentation can prove me right, but just one
experiment can prove me wrong”. The CAGW meme has repeatedly been proved
wrong.
CC has and will always occur whilst Earth has an atmosphere.
There are a number of issues to be aware of however:
There is and never will be a consensus with Science, but the CLIME models of Current Least Incorrect Modeled Explanations.
Timescales are immensely long with Climate and any proof will be hard to conclude.
Many scientists like myself do not subscribe to the CAGW bandwagon that takes your tax payers money away from real controllable issues, such as preparing for the eventual depletion of fossil fuels.
Why the negatives of fossil fuel use are concentrated on, we have our current highly deluxe lifestyles because of this way of life. It won't last forever and it's inevitable that there will be a time far in the future that homo sapiens cannot have such a party as we have now
There are numerous variables wit the climate and models cannot even get the history to be matched.
Trying to reduce CO2 levels if possible is ludicrous and will cost trillions to have any minute effect.
As one well known professor says believing that CO2 causes such changes is close to believing in magic.
Hurricane frequency has been lower of recent and is a natural phenomena.
Other issues/variables are being ignored:
The atmosphere is NOT like a Greenhouse
Deforestation
The Global Supermarket
Many of those banging the drum of CC are quite hypocritical jetting around with their money driven agenda, with multiple homes they are unlikely to be saving much.
If people are really committed saving resources, a good thing IMHO, then are they putting their money where there mouth is?, hence:
Less frequent → journeys, washing, heating, lighting,clothing, meat eating, holidays, commuting, children etc etc.
The whole CAGW gravy train is like a religion (based largely on BS).
Rather than believing all the propaganda do some research maybe these are good to start with:
https://wattsupwiththat.com
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having studied Astrophysics & Climate for 4 decades I know a little about these subjects to comment here.
BOINC ClimateModels all ran too hot 2 decades ago; hence our investigations continue to this day.
Earth is now seen by some as extremely rare & this is my own conjecture also, recently TIMC BBC radio programme had a few guests commenting that the chances that led to ourselves is ~ 10^24, whereas there are ~ 4x10^11 MilkyWay stars.
During my career I've helped Design, Commission & Support some of the most complex Computer/Electronic/ElectroMech systems.
If Humans has enough fuel, provisions, oxygen etc. to get the just Alpha Centauri system, 4.25ly from here it would take at current technology ~80kyears to get there, and there would have to be a vast supply of On Board Spares, Repairs facilities, let alone obsolescence issues that they'd be turning back before exiting our Solar System; unless someone invented a magical Matter replicator with 4D printing or tow a spare Earth.
We humans are part of Earth there is no where we are going, The Moon & Mars possible by what is the motivation to spend vast sums to maintain some sort of base? Gravity of both too small to stay w/o devolving/evolving, where is this leading? Contracts ... $/£
As for burning Hydrocarbons affecting Climatics systems seems highly exaggerated to me, I'm no 'denier' and it's been a long journey, but the benefits of so called FossilFuels far outweigh the negatives, I point you to remarkably insightful books that I recommend all to read:
(i).‘Not For Greens’ by Prof.Ian Plimer,
(ii).‘Apocalypse Never’ by Michael Shellenberger
(iii).'False Alarm' by BjornLomborg
(iv).'Fossil Future' & The Moral Case for fossil fuels by Alex Epstein
(v).'The Great Global Warming Blunder' by Roy W. Spencer
GeorgeBox quote (before it's cancelled on wikipedia):
"All Models are wrong, and...some are useful"
We add:
1.DisbelieveModelOutputs.
2.SanityCheck.
3.Iteratively amend inputs until O/P →Reality.
Gov't still in fear of the GainOfFunction escape from WIV (as per GBNews
SirRichardDearlove interview). Which is why IMHO there was so much CoercionOfJabs, but the NewTechGeneTherapy mRNA/vvDNA are too dangerous in themselves for a 99.x% Surv.Flu leading to massive inc.ofs
