Carbon delusions and defective models

[Locutus]

Shoutout to that Orange fireball in the sky driving the climate.


The relentless war on carbon is justified by the false assumption that global temperature is controlled by human production of two carbon-bearing "greenhouse gases." The scary forecasts of runaway heating are based on complicated but narrowly focused carbon-centric computerized global circulation models built for the U.N. IPCC. These models omit many significant climate factors and rely heavily on dodgy temperature records and unproven assumptions about two trace natural gases in the atmosphere.

The models fail to explain Earth's long history of changing climates and ignore the powerful role of interacting cycles in the solar system, which determine how much solar energy is absorbed and reflected by Earth's atmosphere, clouds, and surface. Several ancient societies and some modern mavericks, without help from million-dollar computers, recognized that the Sun, Moon, and major planets produce cyclic changes in Earth's climate.

The IPCC models also misread the positive and negative temperature feedback from water vapor (the main greenhouse gas), and their accounting for natural processes in the carbon cycle is based on very incomplete knowledge and numerous unproven assumptions.

here

Blog: Carbon delusions and defective models

 

[captain morgan]

The models fail to explain Earth's long history of changing climates

This is, by far and away, the most damning shortcoming of the standard eco-tard and their position

 

[Nick Danger]

Of course, how silly of me to think that thirty billion metric tons of fossil fuel emissions over the last fifty years or so could have any effect at all. Mother Nature can just shrug that off, it's such a big planet.

 

[captain morgan]

A few significant volcanic eruptions exceed all of the fuel burned.

Consider your silliness excused

 

[Angstrom]

I know!!!

Let's build à whole bunch of solar panels and wind generators that are going to need more gas plants to compensate for low peak times, and pollute even more while thinking we are helping.

Got to win the guilty feeling people vote, by pretending we care.

 

[captain morgan]

... As we all know, the construction of the solar panels and wind mills are uber eco-friendly.... It's like giving Gaia a big hug each time we build one... Oh, and as we also know that birds are dirty, carbon emitting scoundrels, the bird-chopping action of the wind mill is also more than welcome

 

[MHz]

Of course, how silly of me to think that thirty billion metric tons of fossil fuel emissions over the last fifty years or so could have any effect at all. Mother Nature can just shrug that off, it's such a big planet.

Apparently in this day and age school is never out. Getting reliable upgrades after 'traditional school' is not a bad thing.

 

[Johnnny]

The world is not warming because of us but on the other hand it's getting a heavy dose of poison.

If they called it "Global Adulteration" instead of global warming then maybe I would be on board

 

[Angstrom]

... As we all know, the construction of the solar panels and wind mills are uber eco-friendly.... It's like giving Gaia a big hug each time we build one... Oh, and as we also know that birds are dirty, carbon emitting scoundrels, the bird-chopping action of the wind mill is also more than welcome

Vote with your feelings & guilt, not your brain.

 

[Jinentonix]

Of course, how silly of me to think that thirty billion metric tons of fossil fuel emissions over the last fifty years or so could have any effect at all. Mother Nature can just shrug that off, it's such a big planet.

Given that some of the climatologists have stated that the atmosphere can handle about a trillion metric tons of CO2 before it reaches its tipping point, I'd say the world is in better shape than the scare mongers want us to believe. That's not to say full steam ahead on GHG production, but there's also no need to play economic suicide either, just so we can hand over our money and resources to the third world so they can have a chance to play.
Those countries have been populated for thousands of years and in some cases were even relatively civilized at some point in the past. Well, if they haven't figured things out by now, f*ck 'em!


Do really think transferring wealth and "dirty" production to countries with incredibly lax, if not completely non-existent environmental laws, is going to reduce GHGs?
Do you really think we're doing anything about reduction in Canada when all the stuff we used to make here is now being shipped by supertankers and massive container ships that spew more pollution and CO2 than ALL of the world's cars combined?


Wake up and smell the f*cking coffee, man. Even at the height of production in Alberta's oil fields, Canada still only produced HALF the GHGs that international shipping creates.
We haven't reduced jack sh*t, we just transferred the "problem" elsewhere.

 

[MHz]

Since we can't change the weather we should at least be able to predict it with some accuracy if there was not a predetermined outlook in mind. The money saved by eliminating blind alleys would not vanish but it would be freed for other projects that have some value.
If there is a plan in motion to keep so many poor and so many not-poor then it comes from the smaller camp of not-poor rather than the poor have seen what money can do and they choose to pass it by. I don't see that happening in a realistic world.

Can you boil water with napalm-in-a-can?

 

[Nick Danger]

That's not to say full steam ahead on GHG production, but there's also no need to play economic suicide either...

Exactly. There is some middle ground. But it would still require a grassroots shift in the way we think. Ideas like "Well as long as we're not the worst offenders, we're okay." are really just a justification for doing nothing at all. Even if our contribution to the overall issue is small, that doesn't release us from a responsibility to do what we can.

If your figures are credible, that we are nowhere near the "tipping point" for atmospheric pollution then perhaps we have some time to get our act in order. But too many read messages like that as justification for stay with the status quo while "somebody else" works on a solution. Maybe that's the plan, it's no secret that the fossil fuel industry is actively engaged in their own campaign to downplay the threats of GHGs, can we be sure that they are telling the truth? Is it even anywhere near smart to simply give them the benefit of the doubt? Profits are a huge motivation, and there are some very real markers to consider like warming trends, ocean acidification and changing weather patterns that suggest we are effecting real changes in the way our planet works. If the science is inconclusive like so many would have us believe, isn't there some wisdom in making sure first, just in case we're heading down a road from which there may be no return?

Do you really think we're doing anything about reduction in Canada when all the stuff we used to make here is now being shipped by supertankers and massive container ships that spew more pollution and CO2 than ALL of the world's cars combined?

There would certainly be something to gain by keeping those jobs and industries at home, but again we would need the general public to be on board with paying a little more at the check-out as the difference in labour costs between here and there are what sends those jobs offshore in the first place.

There is also a big measure of hypocrisy in talking about cleaning up our act at home while sending shipload after shipload of coal and bitumen offshore where, like you say, environmental laws are somewhere between lax and non-existent.

 

[MHz]

I know!!!

Let's build à whole bunch of solar panels and wind generators that are going to need more gas plants to compensate for low peak times, and pollute even more while thinking we are helping.

Got to win the guilty feeling people vote, by pretending we care.

How about we go to some slide prone area in the world and lower all the material down by bucket-line and have that run a genset. When the slide area flat you move onto another spot in the mountains. The throttle would be how many tons per hour were loaded at the top.

Rooftop solar panels or wind generators could be scaled to local use per building that uses most of the power it produces per day and the excess it fed to the grid where all the units combined would allow for power plants to be smaller or run a a lower capacity due to the input from the 'back-up systems'. Low voltage motors is an attraction for solar as a 3v panel and an led could replace streetlights and the fences on the gravel roads and farm yards could be lit up with the same device that is so cheap and plentiful that theft is eliminated.