On the Other Climate Foot . . .

Welcome to the Leverguns.Com Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here ... politely.

Moderators: AmBraCol, Hobie

Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.

Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 11808
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

On the Other Climate Foot . . .

Post by Grizz »

.
https://www.cfact.org/2023/04/26/bingo- ... iscovered/.
.
Hmmmmmmmmm, 19,000 ocean warmer-uppers !?! HEH
.
Ocean-heat-comparison.png
.
NOTICE the share of ocean heating derived from the atmosphere. The whole climate change causation scam is totally exposed by 19,000 volcanoes that "they" CAN'T CONTROL.
.
https://www.newscats.org/antarctica-mel ... greenland/
.
and over on another topic, didja see the evidence from the new telescope that concludes that there was no "big-bang" ?? another narrative that "they" CANNOT CONTROL.
.

.
Another supporting and clarifying leg. Gotta love 'Nature', eh?
.
but, as a friend points out: "men prefer to believe a lie"
.

grizz sendz
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 31933
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland
Contact:

Re: On the Other Climate Foot . . .

Post by AJMD429 »

.
‘Global Warming’ and ‘Climate Change’ are just ways power-seeking individuals flatter the egos of pseudo-intellectuals and guilt-trip the naive, into surrendering power and money (usually other people’s) in exchange for warm-fuzzies and the endorsement of virtue-signaling so they can do essentially nothing useful ‘for the environment’, yet appear to be committed to a good cause. Any dissent is stifled by accusations that the individual “doesn’t care about the environment” and so 95% of the ‘scientists’ agree with it because it is too difficult to do otherwise.
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.


Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1389
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: On the Other Climate Foot . . .

Post by KWK »

Again why are we quantifying co2 and not WV?
Because water vapor is considered a function of the heating, not the other way around. The warmer the air, the more water it can hold.

The theory that CO2 can drive atmospheric heating goes back to when Winchester was a new company and Victoria was queen. Temperature recordings were starting to show it before WW-II. This is nothing new.
User avatar
Ray
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2823
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:45 am

Re: On the Other Climate Foot . . .

Post by Ray »

carbon this, carbon that ! they're always harping on carbon.

When you ask a youngster (-40) just what they mean, the majority think carbon = smutt.....that is to say, smog.....noxious, toxic particulate matter. When you explain that the climate change religious folk are simply referring to carbon dioxide, that essential ingredient for photosynthesis, then you see a brief and minute glimmer of doubt in their eyes (at their earth religion) then they shake their heads in dismissing you (us) and go back to playing with their phones.
m.A.g.a. !
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1389
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: On the Other Climate Foot . . .

Post by KWK »

... didja see the evidence from the new telescope that concludes that there was no "big-bang" ??
No, but I did read that early claims over what was being seen proved to be wrong.
User avatar
Ray
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2823
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:45 am

Re: On the Other Climate Foot . . .

Post by Ray »

Some environmental activism fanatics know no logic/reason. The young special ed. wench in sweden comes to mind.

A p.e.t.a. member bodes you ill if you eat meat or have pets or draft animals then they discover that the worldwide totality (trillions) of ungulates adds more methane to the atmosphere than man's efforts. Suddenly they want all of the cud chewers slain enmasse without any considerations of cost and disposal impossibilities.

An ardent conservationist cares sincerely about marshes/swamps/wetlands then it comes to their attention that freshwater flora and algae belches and bubbles greenhouse gases many times more than all of the manufactory chimneys combined. They suddenly want the bayous drained.

Volcanoes and their inestimatible volumes of noxious and toxic exhausts ? Whatcha gonna do about that ?

And on and on.....It is obvious that the theme of chapter 1 of the apostle paul's epistle to the roman believers is not limited to libidinous perverseness. The earth and surrounding cosmos is one giant idol to "them" and their reprobate minds.
m.A.g.a. !
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1389
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: On the Other Climate Foot . . .

Post by KWK »

... (trillions) of ungulates... flora and algae belches and bubbles greenhouse gases many times more... Volcanoes and their inestimatible volumes
While I don't believe there are trillions of ungulates, I admit I don't understand the fuss over cattle, for here in North America they basically replaced the bison. Regardless, flora and fauna are part of the existing balance. Since the 1950s, we've been able to watch, via CO2 levels, the annual swing of this CO2 cycle. It was those same observations that dashed the hope the natural cycle was absorbing much of the emissions from burning fuel.

There actually is an estimate of what the volcanoes are contributing. CO2 from volcanoes is exposed to radioactive elements churning in the earth, but that from fossil fuels was largely isolated from this millions of years ago. Based on measurements of the isotopes in the CO2 at the mouths of volcanoes, an estimate can be made of the proportions of CO2 emitted. It's 1 or 2 % as I recall. This number is backed by comparing the trend line of CO2 levels to that of how much we're removing from the ground through burning. These two estimates agree, and the conclusion is volcanoes are not a significant source.
User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 31933
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland
Contact:

Re: On the Other Climate Foot . . .

Post by AJMD429 »

.
In my opinion the whole thing has been so contaminated by a combination of vested industrial interests, vested political interests, the egos of scientists, who are unwilling to admit what they don’t know, and the guilt tripping of the average citizen, who just wants to protect the planet, that you really can’t conclude much.

So my assumptions are made that later on prove to be wrong, yet we base layer upon layer of decisions on those assumptions that are so often found to be fundamentally flawed. I’ve heard lots of people make sensible, sounding arguments on both sides of the issue, including even questioning fundamental things like where the CO2 is actually a bad thing to have more of.

Currently, it is fascinating to see scientists finally admitting the fact that atmospheric temperature of air moving over an ocean, that may be a mile or more deep is not terribly likely to change the ocean temperature, particularly when the deeper portions change more than the surface if you exclude the top ten feet or so, and even radiant heat penetrating, the atmospheric may not be as significant as the temperature of the sea bed, which is controlled by internal things going on in the earth that I would have a hard time thinking any human activities are influencing.

I think we would be far better off focusing on unnatural and hard to detoxify, organic chemicals, and plastic microspheres, and so on, that we KNOW are a problem and DO have alternatives for, and we need to let the full force of the capitalist free market address efficient energy production instead of letting politicians who are in the pocket of industry, use fake science to justify funneling money to corporations, who have inferior solutions.

But just like in medical science, there are lots of egos, and lots of big dollars involved, and the public is pretty easy to sway emotionally using fear and guilt. Citizens are made to feel that if they don’t endorse each, and every thing that they are told is ‘going to save the environment’, that they are terrible people and don’t care about baby seals. Academic researchers can’t even get funding for anything that doesn’t support the currently favored industry and support their profits.

Much of it reminds me of when tribal shamans who knew when eclipses were going to happen, would inform the leaders, who would intern tell the public that the gods were angry, and there was going to be doom and disaster, unless more gold, and more virgins, were contributed to their campaigns.

Many of my young relatives keep shouting, “follow the science”, but what that seems to mean is that ‘science’ is determined by whatever they can make up out of thin air and shout louder than other people. If they were willing to allow, rational and civilized debate and objective questioning, the way real science used to be, I would be less skeptical, but I guess there were people ready to imprison Galileo for questioning the idea that the sun revolves around the Earth. Today, those lynch mobs would be known as “environmentalists” which is sad, because there are a lot of environmentalists, who are far more objective, and rational, just like there were a lot of Catholics, who probably didn’t really think Galileo needed to be in prison.
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.


Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "
User avatar
KWK
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1389
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:31 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: On the Other Climate Foot . . .

Post by KWK »

There is no question the debate is twisted. I've read from climate scientists that the models have so many levers and knobs that you can get any result you want out of them. Knowledge of the heat transfer to the oceans is indeed one area lacking.

However, the basic physics are undeniable and have been known since shortly after the Civil War. Piling on the CO2 is not going to end well. The lack of understanding in some portions of the models only affects the accuracy of the predictions for how much warming there will be. It doesn't change the fact that warming will occur and will only grow worse if we continue as before.

Despite what that fool Biden says, it is not an "existential" threat, but it will make life less comfortable. Currently, Democrats are salivating at the thought of the all the controls they might exert over great swaths of the economy, with the goal of benefiting favored elements of the electorate. The direct and proper solution, a tax or an auction on CO2 emissions, won't give them the control they crave, so they reject it, despite that nearly every economist out there feels it's the best approach to the problem. Despite what that fool Trump says, this can only work under an international agreement. I rather doubt anything useful will get done.
Post Reply