The house is on fire.

[cyrano]

I think you made the right decision no doubt. Wonder where he heard that term??

One of the other pupils overheard some adults talking, possibly at school. That sparked their imagination, as they understood from the tone it was something very bad.

 

[s2udio]

http://www.theartofannihilation.com/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-a-decade-of-social-manipulation-for-the-corporate-capture-of-nature-crescendo/

 

[cyrano]

Are you sure you want to quote Cory Morningstar. Might upset a lot of the folks on this forum. Especially her views on Venezuela, Colombia, Syria...

For those interested in learning a bit, have a look at her YT Channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ3QashBd3jLASXgh53j9ww

 

[DaveP]

Well s2udio, it appears you have found someone to articulate what you were unwilling to  yourself.

So Cory Morningstar, really knows what's going on and all the brightest scientific brains around the world are deluded, what a comforting thought.  It is after all a plot by all the NGO's to control the world, thank you for enlightening us, we will know to listen the next time you comment.  When Greenpeace started in my youth, I had no idea they had such an evil agenda, maybe this is the plot of the next James Bond movie?  I'm sure Cory knows!

DaveP

 

[cyrano]

I'm sorry Dave, can't do that...

Sorry, couldn't resist the urge. Kubrick fan.

Cory doesn't deny climate change. She just seems to think Greta Thunberg is a fabrication. And I respect Cory enough to take her thoughts seriously.

That said, there are fabrications and fabrications. My take on it is that Greta is authentic. But that's because I happen to know a lot about eco activists in Scandinavia. They have a rather pragmatic view about action. I'm every bit as skeptical as Cory about Greenpeace, fi, but I still would accept their help.

Maybe Cory got a bit carried away on this one?

 

[DaveP]

Maybe Cory got a bit carried away on this one?

I was taught that a real expert is able to convey their ideas succinctly in a way that even non-experts can understand.

Her article comes into the catagory of psychobabble IMHO.  The technique is used to overwhelm and to give the appearance of enormous research.  Do you remember Tands?  He used the same technique.  He was unable to articulate his own arguements, he just posted other peoples stuff with the assumption that we would all see the conspiracy, well I didn't.

Greenpeace may well have recognised the effectiveness of her presentation and jumped on her bandwagon, that does not make them conspirators.

When people don't like a truth being expressed, they use all sorts of deflections and conspiracies that are even more obsure than the truth itself.

As a retired scientist, all I need to know is that the CO2 level is going to levels last seen in the time of the dinosaurs.  The vegetation that was around then got compressed down to coal and oil taking the CO2 with it.  We burn that carbon and the CO2 goes back to where is was very quickly, too quickly for nature to put it back underground because we have cut down most of the vegetation that was around in the past.  It is not rocket science, a child can understand it and one has.

DaveP

 

[DaveP]

Being concerned does not make one an expert.

No it does not, but we all have different gifts.

Some have the ability to carry out painstaking research over decades to provide data.

Some have the mathematical modeling skills to interpret that data.

Some have the presentational skills to convey the results.

Some are concerned enough to demand action.

Fortunately the world has all of these people.

DaveP

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Being concerned does not make one an expert.
It's a quite frequent syndrome; people who had someone killed in a road accident suddenly become experts in road traffic safety, others that have relatives dead of abestosis become experts in pollution risk. They create a non-profit organization and become a dominant voice and opinion-maker, when they have no scientific approach in the matter, only preconceived ideas and resentment. This is prejudicial because it steers the attention off the real issues.

 

[ruffrecords]

As a retired scientist, all I need to know is that the CO2 level is going to levels last seen in the time of the dinosaurs.  The vegetation that was around then got compressed down to coal and oil taking the CO2 with it.  We burn that carbon and the CO2 goes back to where is was very quickly, too quickly for nature to put it back underground because we have cut down most of the vegetation that was around in the past.  It is not rocket science, a child can understand it and one has.

DaveP

https://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html

Cheers

Ian

 

[ruffrecords]

And:

https://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html#anchor2117056

Cheers

Ian

 

[DaveP]

And:

https://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html#anchor2117056

This site last updated October 5, 2007

DaveP

 

[DaveP]

https://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html

The first chart shows 370ppm in year 2000, it is now 401ppm getting on for double the rest of the figures over the last 400,000 years, again very old website that has not been kept up to date, someone had a change of heart?

DaveP

 

[cyrano]

Fallacy. Lemme explain...

The idea that man-made pollution is responsible for global warming is not supported by historical fact.

True.

However, historical fact does not disprove it either.

I'm not convinced climate change is 100% caused by human action. But I'm 100% convinced it is happening.

I'm not convinced on the time scale. A century before it will be a problem? 50 years? 500 years?

I'm not convinced we can do something about it. But shouldn't we at least try?

 

[ruffrecords]

The first chart shows 370ppm in year 2000, it is now 401ppm getting on for double the rest of the figures over the last 400,000 years, again very old website that has not been kept up to date, someone had a change of heart?

DaveP

Or maybe got fed up with being browbeaten by alarmists? Who knows. Does the age of the information make it wrong?

Cheers

Ian

 

[cyrano]

Policing existing legislature would be a nice start...

An example: discarded fridges can't be exported from the EU. So, you can't send a container of old fridges from any EU port. They need to be properly recycled.

That's the theory, at least. In practice, these fridges get stuffed into old cars and trucks. The container's bill lists only cars. Of course, that's not permitted either. But, as an example,  there are only TWO inspectors for that kind of stuff in the entire port of Hamburg. Hamburg handles millions of containers every year. In Antwerp, we don't even have specialised inspectors for that. It's all left to customs. There are environmental inspectors, but they don't inspect containers.

And the same goes for electronics, hazardous waste...

 

[Matador]

Does the age of the information make it wrong?

In this case, perhaps.

A paper from 2012:

Antarctic ice cores provide clear evidence of a close coupling between variations in Antarctic temperature and the atmospheric concentration of CO2 during the glacial/interglacial cycles of at least the past 800-thousand years. Precise information on the relative timing of the temperature and CO2 changes can assist in refining our understanding of the physical processes involved in this coupling. Here, we focus on the last deglaciation, 19 000 to 11 000 yr before present, during which CO2 concentrations increased by ∼ 80 parts per million by volume and Antarctic temperature increased by ∼ 10 ◦C. Utilising a recently developed proxy for regional Antarctic temperature, derived from five near-coastal ice cores and two ice core CO2 records with high dating precision, we show that the increase in CO2 likely lagged the increase in regional Antarctic temperature by less than 400 yr and that even a short lead of CO2 over temperature cannot be excluded.

Followed by another paper in 2013:

Understanding the role of atmospheric CO2 concentration during past climate warmings requires clear knowledge of how it varies in time relative to temperature...We infer phasing between aCO2 and AT at four times when their trends changed abruptly.  We find so significant lead/lag, with 1 sigma accuracy ranging from 160 yr to 90 yr, indicating that aCO2 did not begin to rise hundreds of years after Antarctic temperature, as has been suggested by earlier studies.

 

[ruffrecords]

In this case, perhaps.

A paper from 2012:

Followed by another paper in 2013:

Interesting. Can I have references please. I would like to read these papers.

Cheers

Ian

 

[Matador]

That's odd - I had links at the beginning of the text but I must have been missing closing tags.  Original post fixed.

 

[boji]

Anyone that's stood next to an idling car in the summer knows how hot it gets. Multiply that by a billion, every day.

The average car exhaust temperatures can reach 800F at the converter at 60mph.
Exhaust manifold temps can reach over 1000F under load.

Note that:
Only about 15 percent of the energy from the fuel you put in your tank gets used to move your car down the road or run useful accessories, such as air conditioning. The rest of the energy is lost to engine and driveline inefficiencies and idling.

That means a majority of the gasoline in cars is being used to heat the environment. I don't know of any studies on car temperatures and AGW, but everyone talks about CO2 as the main worry, but what about the problem of heat itself being produced by over a billion cars, trucks, factories, industries each day? This has to add up, and so far the seas have been the world's radiator. This is to say if all the oil is trapped sunlight, what would the releasing of millions of years of energy do to the oceans in just a mere 400 years?  Ever tried to open your radiator cap after running your engine for a little bit?  So say the oceans are so big it only will increase the temperature of the 'coolant' by a few degrees. What about all the methane trapped in the polar regions that gets released with just a few degrees of warming?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWoiBpfvdx0

 

[ruffrecords]

That's odd - I had links at the beginning of the text but I must have been missing closing tags.  Original post fixed.

Thanks. I have downloaded them.

Cheers

Ian