Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Environmentalism and Global Warming Thread

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Did you read that semi-literate article? The Steve Kroft "interview" that is in it is a complete joke. Take this exchange for example:

    Kelsey Juliana: There was a wildfire season that was so intense, we have been suggested to not go exterior. The particulate matter within the smoke was actually off the charts. I imply, it was so unhealthy it was previous extreme, by way of hazard to well being.

    Steve Kroft: And also you suppose that is due to local weather change.

    Kelsey Juliana: That is what scientists inform me.

    It is not simply scientists. Even the federal authorities now acknowledges in its response to the lawsuit that the results of local weather change are already taking place and prone to worsen, particularly for younger individuals who should take care of them for the long run.
    Name them. Name the scientists you talked to Ms. Juilana. Cite the authorities by name. Produce some documents to prove your claim.

    On the plaintiffs:

    She was 19 when the lawsuit was filed and the oldest of 21 plaintiffs. They arrive from ten completely different states and all declare to be affected or threatened by the implications of local weather change. The youngest, Levi Draheim, is in sixth grade.
    A sixth grader? The kid probably can't do linear algebra and doesn't even know what a periodic table is. How ill-informed can someone be in terms of bring a technical lawsuit?

    Or this tripe:

    He is lived most of his life on the seashores of a barrier island in Florida that is a mile vast and barely above sea stage.

    Steve Kroft: What’s your greatest worry about this island?

    Levi Draheim: I worry that I will not have a house right here sooner or later.

    Steve Kroft: That the island might be gone.

    Levi Draheim: Yeah. That the island might be underwater due to local weather change.

    Steve Kroft: So you are feeling such as you’ve obtained a stake on this.

    Levi Draheim: Sure.
    You choose, well your parents choose, to live on an island that is barely above sea level and is prone to erosion and you think it's somehow the fault of Exxon that it might disappear?
    Let's postulate for a moment in a thought experiment. Levi gets everything he wants from the lawsuit. But, ten years later his island disappears into the ocean as a result of erosion. Could he sue someone, anyone for that? The weather is variable, as is planetary climate.

    Or this idiocy:
    It paperwork what and when previous U.S. administrations knew in regards to the connection between fossil fuels and local weather change. The timeline goes again 50 years, starting with the presidency of Lyndon Johnson.

    Julia Olson: So throughout President Johnson’s administration, they issued a report in 1965 that talked about local weather change being a catastrophic menace.

    Whether or not it was a Democrat or a Republican in workplace, Olson says, there was an consciousness of the potential risks of carbon dioxide emissions
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

    Probably as much research as Julia did... That aside, even that simplistic reference refutes her claim in that statement entirely.

    One might note that in 1965 that plate tectonics was a barely understood scientific principle, that the Van Allen Radiation belt had been discovered only seven years prior (1958) and was poorly understood.
    Her simplistic view of what was going on at the time is reflected in the state of science then to now. We hadn't even accurately mapped the bottom of the oceans in 1965.

    It is a lawsuit without merit.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
      The bottom line is that the planet's atmosphere is a complex system that isn't being modelled by climate scientists with any great degree of accuracy. Yet, they are making predictions from these crude models that don't match observed data.
      Some predictions make sense though, and are indeed a source of concern, if not of the apocalyptic variety :

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17417960

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3403971/

      Additional file 1:
      This map shows where the distribution limits of aedine species in Europe are to be expected due to their minimum survival temperature of eggs. In the experiment, European diapausing Aedes albopictus survived -10°C, European non-diapausing Ae. albopictus -7°C, tropical Ae. albopictus and Aedes aegypti -2°C for 12h. Obviously, there is only a narrow margin between regions with a possible winter survival of non-diapausing eggs and those where winter survival of diapausing eggs seems to be possible.

      Click here for file
      Last edited by Snowygerry; 05 Mar 19, 03:11.
      High Admiral Snowy, Commander In Chief of the Naval Forces of The Phoenix Confederation.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post

        Some predictions make sense though, and are indeed a source of concern, if not of the apocalyptic variety :

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17417960

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3403971/
        The spread of disease vectors like mosquitos or of invasive species is more due to the world that is becoming increasingly interconnected. For example, here in Arizona, we now get cases of West Nile Virus from mosquitos. That disease got here most likely by someone having it and being bitten by a non-carrying mosquito that subsequently spread it. We now get cases every year, though few in number it is spreading slowly.
        Fire ants and Africanized bees are two more invasive species in the US now. Kudzu is another. The quagga mussel, arriving in the US via ship's ballast tanks, is yet another.

        Comment


        • End of the last Ice Age shows how bad global warming can be. Ocean levels rose so much that a forest on the seabed of the North Sea is now far underwater. And the Mediterranean basin filled to it's current level, instead of the few isolated lakes it once was. And we lost that mile of ice that used to cover the land where I now live.

          Comment


          • Any time you are dealing with something as complex as climate change and it's impact on humans predictions generally have to be extremely accurate because the solutions have to take so many separate details into account. The predictions have proven to be extremely inaccurate regarding climate change producing political reactions out of proportion to the problem. Not only is natural environment unstable but so are the political structures. Radical change in both the natural and political realms is a recipe for disaster. Perhaps the best example from recent events is peak oil. The amount of economic damage done by a political reaction to inaccurate data during the peak oil panic shows how being overly cautious can be dangerous. Creating an atmosphere of panic is almost always counter productive.
            We hunt the hunters

            Comment


            • Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
              (...) Perhaps the best example from recent events is peak oil. The amount of economic damage done by a political reaction to inaccurate data during the peak oil panic shows how being overly cautious can be dangerous.
              What economic damage was done exactly in your opinion ?

              Oil prices these days are driven by demand, not supply like it was in 1970s for instance.

              That's an improvement imho.

              Creating an atmosphere of panic is almost always counter productive.
              Not so sure - a well aimed panic can be extremely profitable depending your intention , but that has nothing to do with the consequences of climate change


              But I see your point, I do not suggest we join the alarmists,

              just that we do not waste time by repeatedly pointing out that climate change is not solely anthropogenic.


              Last edited by Snowygerry; 06 Mar 19, 03:29.
              High Admiral Snowy, Commander In Chief of the Naval Forces of The Phoenix Confederation.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post

                What economic damage was done exactly in your opinion ?

                Oil prices these days are driven by demand, not supply like it was in 1970s for instance.

                That's an improvement imho.
                The answer can be summed up in one word pessimism. The end of the world is always just around the corner and it is easy to convince people that it is so. We are hard wired for the "negative bias", it takes a thousand at ataboys to make up for one mild criticism.

                It is ironic that Jimmy Carter's speech designed to sow optimism will forever be know as the malaise speech.

                It is not without some justification that economists suggest that Carter was the victim not the cause of the economic problems of the late 70s. Carter certainly didn't make us dependent on oil imports. Many of the policies he outlined in the malaise speech were in fact necessary reforms to deal with the oil crisis. That said what was never addressed was the effect that the delusion of peak oil had on policy. Nothing Carter could have said was ever going to dismiss the pessimism induced by the fantasy of peak oil. People had a common sense understanding of the dependence on oil but who could argue with the "scientists" the experts on the question of reserves. It would be equally fair to say that Reagan was not solely responsible for the economic recover. Discounting the role that optimism played and Reagan's role in restoring that optimism should not be ignored.

                The similarities in the pessimism that Carter's optimism speech induced and our current situation as it relates to global warming are fairly stark. The alarmist have created an environment in which a problem exists for which there is obviously no solution. If Global Warmer is going to destroy the world for our children then it is a fait accompli. I would suggest that we have no more reason to believe the "experts" are right about the consequences of Global Warming than they were about the consequences of peak oil. Another similarity with the moral panic of peak oil is in the solutions. Carter said we would have achieve 20 percent of out energy from solar by 2000 while the reality is that we produced 1.6 percent of our energy from solar in 2017. Pessimism about the consequences and optimism about the solutions represent considerable cognitive dissonance.

                The other aspect of the Carter plan that is worth comparison is the similarity between carbon tax and Carter's proposed Wind Fall Profit tax which in effect was not a profit tax but an excise tax. For some people it may seem counter intuitive but both increase marginal production costs, reduce domestic production and increase imports. A tax on capital reduces the rate of return, discourages investment, and and artificially raises prices.

                I'm in favor of conservation of resources. A penny saved is a penny earned if it is an investment that keeps pace with inflation and stimulates growth. Moral panics however do not lend themselves to rational choices. When alternative energy sources become cost effective they will be adopted. Pretending that we are in control of that process or that it can be artificial imposed is delusional. The assumption that the "experts" are wise and the market evil is dangerous hubris. The fact that the experts always argue for the use of force is the biggest mistake that they repeatedly make. History is full of examples of how the experts utopia is dystopian. Complex chaotic system remain beyond the power of our science to effectively model.







                We hunt the hunters

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post

                  What economic damage was done exactly in your opinion ?

                  Oil prices these days are driven by demand, not supply like it was in 1970s for instance.

                  That's an improvement imho.



                  Not so sure - a well aimed panic can be extremely profitable depending your intention , but that has nothing to do with the consequences of climate change


                  But I see your point, I do not suggest we join the alarmists,

                  just that we do not waste time by repeatedly pointing out that climate change is not solely anthropogenic.

                  Considering the anthropogenic proponents are advocating extreme social, economic and technology "corrections" for something we may not be able to fix or correct, would seem a lot more discussion would be advisable over ill-thought-out and hasty actions.

                  So far, it would appear we don't know or understand the extent of natural factors causing climate to change/flux.
                  So far some think that climate is something that can be placed in a stasis, or constant middle range of variation, but geological records show otherwise.
                  We should be considering methods of adaptation first; alterations or "corrections" with much more investigation, research and consideration before engaging, if at all.

                  For example, it was the fault of the whales, whom couldn't reproduce quickly enough to match human consumption demands that led to consideration of and switch over to petroleum to fill the needs and voids.

                  Comment


                  • Much too long of a to-do list of chores for the day, so without a yea-or-nay, but archiving for now;

                    The Climate Change Paper So Depressing It's Sending People to Therapy

                    On average, three people read an academic paper. At least 100,000 have read this—and a lot of them haven't taken it very well.
                    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/v...ple-to-therapy

                    The study on collapse they thought you should not read – yet
                    https://jembendell.wordpress.com/201...-not-read-yet/

                    Comment


                    • Okay, I skimmed over Deep Adaptation. It's 36 printed pages of academese. I'll read it later today. So far, I'm not impressed.

                      Comment


                      • Okay, I read Jem Bendell's paper Deep Adaptation. What a piece of tripe that was. If I had to describe it in a word, vapid. It is shallow, vague, and unrelentingly Leftist. It offers nothing of any real value.

                        But, I suppose like-minded Leftists reading that nonsense might get upset at what he proposes might happen in the future.

                        Me? Meh. He's a shallow intellect with a BA in geography and a PhD in something that isn't impressing me as any sort of great mind. If anything, he's a parrot of the Gorebal Warming crowd and safely ignored as essentially a "useful idiot."

                        Comment


                        • ^ Thanks! Fits the hunch I had.
                          Between snowing weather and inside and outside chores to do, didn't have much time to look thru it. Might later, to do the slice-n-dice such propaganda usually deserves ~ invites.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                            ^ Thanks! Fits the hunch I had.
                            Between snowing weather and inside and outside chores to do, didn't have much time to look thru it. Might later, to do the slice-n-dice such propaganda usually deserves ~ invites.
                            For example, Bendell says, "Eminent climate scientist James Hansen has always been ahead of the conservative consensus in his analyses and predictions."

                            That's "Hockey stick Hanson" who has deliberately fudged and altered data being caught more than once doing it.

                            Or, this wonderful piece of crap. "Studies have consistently found that more people are losing faith in electoral democracy and in the economic system (Bendell and Lopatin, 2017)"

                            He cites HIMSELF for Christ's sake! How's that for a piece of circular reasoning?

                            Basically, that whole section of the paper, much like Marx and other Leftist writers argues that a move to a Leftist world is happening and inevitable.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                              For example, Bendell says, "Eminent climate scientist James Hansen has always been ahead of the conservative consensus in his analyses and predictions."

                              That's "Hockey stick Hanson" who has deliberately fudged and altered data being caught more than once doing it.

                              Or, this wonderful piece of crap. "Studies have consistently found that more people are losing faith in electoral democracy and in the economic system (Bendell and Lopatin, 2017)"

                              He cites HIMSELF for Christ's sake! How's that for a piece of circular reasoning?

                              Basically, that whole section of the paper, much like Marx and other Leftist writers argues that a move to a Leftist world is happening and inevitable.
                              Well, you just gave insight in why not to give it much credit, but I suspect the usual pro-ACC/AGW will cream their panties over this and think it's the great revelation from on high.

                              Comment


                              • Now here's an interesting example of how little we know or understand regards factors affecting Earth's climate, especially over the span of millions or more of years ...

                                Earth’s Rock Record Could Reveal the Motions of Other Planets

                                Studying the layers of Earth’s crust, scientists have created a “Geological Orrery” to measure planetary motions dating back hundreds of millions of years
                                ....


                                On a planet like Earth, as the rock and the water go through cycles and changes, melting and cooling and eroding and accreting, stripped out in wide valleys and stacked up in towering mountains, the natural phenomena of the past leave traces behind in the crust of the planet. By coring out ancient ice, for example, scientists can study the trapped particles and learn about atmospheric conditions millions of years ago. By studying magnetic minerals embedded in ancient rock, geologists have learned that the magnetic field of the planet reverses poles—about once every 250,000 years on average.

                                Scientists can learn a great deal about Earth from the geological layers of its crust, but even more information may be hidden within the rock record. According to geologist and paleontologist Paul Olsen of Columbia University, the keys to the history of not only our planet, but also the solar system and the galaxy may be found beneath our feet.

                                In a study published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, Olsen and colleagues argue that astronomical cycles of the planets can be measured in terrestrial rock layers. Cylindrical cores of rock extracted from the ground, some stretching thousands of feet and spanning millions of years of history, may contain subtle traces of the influence of other planets’ gravity, allowing scientists to infer the historical positions of planets hundreds of millions of years ago.
                                ...
                                “This paper is an attempt to solve a very difficult and perplexing problem for astronomers and geologists who are interested in the history of the solar system, and how it has affected the Earth’s system—climate, sedimentation, etcetera,” says Spencer Lucas, a geologist and paleontologist at the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science who was not involved in the study. “These astronomical cycles have evolved for hundreds of millions of years, and there’s a certain amount of chaos in that evolution, so it has always been a big challenge for geologists and astronomers to try to understand what happened to these cycles.”

                                The layers of Earth’s crust represent a record of past climates, and those climates were influenced by celestial movements called Milankovitch cycles. Named for Serbian geophysicist and astronomer Milutin Milankovitch, these cycles are the result of Earth’s gravitational interactions with other planets which influence Earth’s trajectory around the sun, including the shape of its elliptical path (eccentricity), as well as the tilt (obliquity) and wobbling (precession) of the planet’s axis.

                                Changes to Earth’s orbit affect the planet’s climate, and as Olsen first argued in a 1986 paper in Science, a record of past climates could therefore be used to infer the positions and motions of other planets.
                                ...
                                Laskar’s earlier computational models also provided evidence that the inner planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars) may behave chaotically. Or in other words, the positions of these four planets could be largely determined by initial conditions, making them almost impossible to predict based solely on the positions and directions seen today.

                                These rock records of climate change turn out to be the key to figuring out what the solar system is actually doing,” Olsen says.
                                ...
                                “One of the cycles was not tied directly to anything known at the time in orbital cycles,” Olsen says.

                                “It was about two million years long, and I didn't know what it was.”
                                After receiving a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant in the 1990s to dig up and analyze nearly 22,600 feet of continuous cores from seven sites within the Newark Supergroup, Olsen and his colleagues discovered that the mysterious cycle was a long-period orbital cycle caused by the interactions between Mars and Earth. The finding “provides the first geological evidence of the chaotic behavior of the inner planets,” Olsen and Dennis Kent, a professor of geology at Rutgers University and coauthor on the new research, wrote in a 1999 paper published by the Royal Society.
                                ...
                                By matching traces of the Earth’s magnetic field reversals in the Chinle Formation sample core to those in the Newark core, the researchers were able to infer the exact dates of climatic cycles caused by the gravity of other planets. Their analysis revealed a 405,000-year cycle in celestial mechanics caused by Jupiter and Venus that has existed for 200 million years, exactly as it is today.
                                ...
                                https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...ery-180971615/


                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X