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

  • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

    My biggest objection is that the planet's atmosphere is heated by a complex set of different things, not all of which are well understood. The CO2 theory pretty much ignores that or brushes aside objections and says that correlation is causation. That makes it largely, if not entirely, a combination of a prompter hoc and cherry picking fallacy.

    Just remember, we barely had any clue what the bottom of the oceans looked like fifty years ago, knew nothing of plate tectonics a century ago. Yet, we have a whole raft of climate scientists telling us they suddenly have a good grasp on the atmosphere and climate change. These are the same guys that got the hole in the ozone layer wrong, climate change in the 70's (global cooling) wrong, and haven't been able to successfully model or predict climate change so far. What reason do I have to believe them suddenly?
    that I can agree with
    The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

    Comment


    • One problem with graphs is that often they are cherry picked and selective, and when showing a small slice of historical record can give a distortion of the larger picture and billions of years of trend.

      Earth has had climate change for over four billion years, ever since the planet got a hydrosphere and subsequent biosphere. Note that for nearly two of those four billion years there was far less oxygen and much more carbon dioxide than now.

      Just to illustrate classic dis-information tactics;

      The climate crisis explained in 10 charts

      https://www.theguardian.com/environm...=pocket-newtab
      TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

      Comment


      • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
        One problem with graphs is that often they are cherry picked and selective, and when showing a small slice of historical record can give a distortion of the larger picture and billions of years of trend.

        Earth has had climate change for over four billion years, ever since the planet got a hydrosphere and subsequent biosphere. Note that for nearly two of those four billion years there was far less oxygen and much more carbon dioxide than now.

        Just to illustrate classic dis-information tactics;

        The climate crisis explained in 10 charts

        https://www.theguardian.com/environm...=pocket-newtab
        Michael Mann's "hockey stick" graph is used in that article?! How much more discredited can you get?

        I like their battery car graph. It shows that by 2018 there have been a cumulative sale of about 6 million battery powered vehicles. Compare that to the production of vehicles total worldwide at roughly 70 million for 2018 alone. Battery cars represent less than 1% of the market over the time period in that graph.

        The solar - wind graph is equally disingenuous. Solar and wind represent niche power sources.



        That's typical of such breakdowns on world energy production. By the by, it's interesting to note that the world's leading countries in solar and wind power are also the ones that have the highest energy costs per KWH. Their prices are about triple other nation's.

        Basically, The Guardian's article is little more than propaganda of the worst sort.

        Comment


        • TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

          Comment


          • TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

            Comment


            • TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

              Comment


              • Well, those editorial comics certainly convinced me.
                AHIKS - Play by (E)mail board wargaming since 1965.
                The Blitz - Play by Email computer wargaming.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Duncan View Post
                  Well, those editorial comics certainly convinced me.
                  Of what ?
                  Or ... in what way?

                  Further reinforcing ACC/AGW belief and support?

                  ...

                  That "the Science", as well as the political, ideological, and emotional aspects Might remain open for further Discussion and Consideration ... ???

                  Especially before engaging any rash, haphazard and/or ill-conceived "solutions" ???

                  ... Just for starters ...
                  TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                  Comment


                  • 0718_cartoon.jpg

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Jutland View Post
                      Comparing apples to potatoes ...
                      .... not to mention this is neither scientific nor logical.
                      TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

                        Comparing apples to potatoes ...
                        .... not to mention this is neither scientific nor logical.
                        Yeah because cartoons of people crucified by ISIS totally is....

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Jutland View Post

                          Yeah because cartoons of people crucified by ISIS totally is....
                          ISIS is a larger threat to life than the 0.01% of dry atmosphere content which is the amount of CO2 above that needed by 99+% of life on this planet (flora~plants).

                          Note in this graph (which only shows 800,000 years out of @ 4,500,000,000 of Earth lifetime) that there are times when temperature increase PRECEDES CO2 increase and also times when temperatures drop lower despite CO2 increase. Indication would be there is little if any linkage with CO2 and temperature, and if anything it is temperatures which might drive the CO2 levels.

                          Also note the cycling of 'peaks and valleys' illustrating that climate is constantly changing.

                          Chart source;
                          https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/global-war...erature-change

                          Last edited by G David Bock; 24 Sep 19, 15:33.
                          TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                          Comment


                          • Pulled from a post on page 74, a reminder of the Earth's atmospheric composition and the small part that is CO2;

                            TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

                              ISIS is a larger threat to life than the 0.01% of dry atmosphere content which is the amount of CO2 above that needed by 99+% of life on this planet (flora~plants).

                              Note in this graph (which only shows 800,000 years out of @ 4,500,000,000 of Earth lifetime) that there are times when temperature increase PRECEDES CO2 increase and also times when temperatures drop lower despite CO2 increase. Indication would be there is little if any linkage with CO2 and temperature, and if anything it is temperatures which might drive the CO2 levels.

                              Also note the cycling of 'peaks and valleys' illustrating that climate is constantly changing.

                              Chart source;
                              https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/global-war...erature-change

                              Humans plants and animals also need water to live, but if you tied somebody to a bed and forced them to drink huge quantities of water you would kill them.....

                              Your graph clearly shows a link between Temp and CO2, and recent studies (newer ones than your graph) do indicate that CO2 does not lag temp.

                              Natural climate change in the past proves that climate is sensitive to an energy imbalance. If the planet accumulates heat, global temperatures will go up. Currently, CO2 is imposing an energy imbalance due to the enhanced greenhouse effect. Past climate change actually provides evidence for our climate's sensitivity to CO2.

                              Comment


                              • The context of planet Earth history showing CO2 versus temperatures. Hopefully the graph speaks for itself and shows the fallacy of the ACC/AGW hypothesis;


                                TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X