Very bad news

[cyrano]

I'm wondering why you seem to think no politicians are credible, except the few you support, John.

From the politicians I know personally and well enough to understand their motives, around half are credible. Most of those credible ones are what you would call "extreme left wing". The ones on the right all seem far more interested in themselves and their own halo to be even remotely interested in society and other people. Unless these are voters or profitable in any other way.

Still, a good idea is a good idea. You won't see me derating it because it came from the "wrong" side...

 

[Banzai]

... and read his detailed analysis if the last 1000 years of weather and then read his caution for anyone trying to predict climate change over the nest 50 to 100 years.

The 900 years before the last 100 are irrelevant: there's no precedent for the rate at which were massacring this planet.

 

[ruffrecords]

The 900 years before the last 100 are irrelevant: there's no precedent for the rate at which were massacring this planet.

I agree in terms of the pollutants were are throwing into the oceans but of course CO2 is not a pollutant.

Cheers

Ian

 

[JohnRoberts]

More veers and distraction. The real questions that remain is what do we do, and when? Shutting down the fossil fuel industry is a cosmetic feel-good exercise, not a sensible, practical temperature managing strategy.

Some more old "climate" questions a) what temperature should we hold the planet unchanged at? b) when do we need to start regulating planet temperature? c) do you feel lucky enough to start messing with mother nature (and potentially chaotic climate systems), without doing a lot more homework?

Smart, sensible people have been looking at this for decades and even they do not have all the answers for the actual questions.

JR

PS: I am thinking about buying and reading the Koonin book (unsettled), but haven't yet. I expect he will be preaching to the choir (me).

 

[crazydoc]

The real questions that remain is what do we do, and when?

There's nothing we can do yet. Look at the pitiful response to the covid pandemic for a preview. It will take huge weather and economic catastrophes, population decimations and uninhabitable areas to decrease we human's ability to turn the planet into a runaway greenhouse.

Just another evolutionary step.

 

[living sounds]

I agree in terms of the pollutants were are throwing into the oceans but of course CO2 is not a pollutant.

Cheers

Ian

The dose makes the poison. The argument becomes semantic when CO2 is causing a runaway greenhouse effect, the same as when organohalogen compounds cause depletion of the ozone layer.

 

[Banzai]

I agree in terms of the pollutants were are throwing into the oceans but of course CO2 is not a pollutant.

Cheers

Ian

Pollutants is only part of it. We're killing the oceans and our lands with intensive fishing and crop farming. We need both to be healthy to regulate our climate.

What's the point anyway in having a billion cows when farmers can barely break even on the milk and meat they sell? Why are we subsidising dairy farmers and fisheries? There's obviously too many of them, and there's too much competition already.

Never see JR complain about the trillions lost on farmers – is welfare only a problem when it's given to immigrants?

More veers and distraction. The real questions that remain is what do we do, and when? Shutting down the fossil fuel industry is a cosmetic feel-good exercise, not a sensible, practical temperature managing strategy.

Some more old "climate" questions a) what temperature should we hold the planet unchanged at? b) when do we need to start regulating planet temperature? c) do you feel lucky enough to start messing with mother nature (and potentially chaotic climate systems), without doing a lot more homework?

Smart, sensible people have been looking at this for decades and even they do not have all the answers for the actual questions.

JR

PS: I am thinking about buying and reading the Koonin book (unsettled), but haven't yet. I expect he will be preaching to the choir (me).

Again missing the point. World population has gone from 1.5-2B to 8B in 100 years. There's no recorded historical precedent for this many people wrecking the planet merely by existing.

 

[JohnRoberts]

There's nothing we can do yet. Look at the pitiful response to the covid pandemic for a preview. It will take huge weather and economic catastrophes, population decimations and uninhabitable areas to decrease we human's ability to turn the planet into a runaway greenhouse.

Just another evolutionary step.

There is not much for you and I to do, but economists and scientists have been chewing on this for years, decades.

Never see JR complain about the trillions lost on farmers – is welfare only a problem when it's given to immigrants?

you want me to complain about farming?

Jul 12, 2021 · A third judge last week struck down the Biden administration’s multi-billion-dollar farm aid program that expressly excludes whites.

now that's racist.

Again missing the point. World population has gone from 1.5-2B to 8B in 100 years. There's no recorded historical precedent for this many people wrecking the planet merely by existing.

ah the old population bomb rant... that is several decades old.

JR

PS: I am not the forum genie that you can summon by mentioning my name.. but i was already here, posting.

 

[living sounds]

do you feel lucky enough to start messing with mother nature (and potentially chaotic climate systems), without doing a lot more homework?

The thing is that we are messing with mother nature now and have been doing it for centuries, at an ever increasing scale. That's what got us into this mess. I certainly wouldn't rule out technological solutions, there is probably no way around it. But when, how and what is first and foremost a question for the experts...

Until then it's best to do what is possible to cut carbon emissions etc.

 

[ruffrecords]

The dose makes the poison. The argument becomes semantic when CO2 is causing a runaway greenhouse effect, the same as when organohalogen compounds cause depletion of the ozone layer.

The inconvenient truth is that CO2 makes up a mere .0.04% of the atmosphere. To make it even a slightly viable greenhouse gas the climate catastrophe pundits were forced to invent an (unproven) amplification or positive feedback mechanism which increases its effect tenfold. Even so it is an order of magnitude less effective than plain water vapour which makes up about 4% of the atmosphere.

But as JR says, it is typical of the arrogance of mankind that we are blind to the greater forces of nature and assume we are the problem and even worse that we are the solution. There are areas, like pollution of the seas, where we are both the cause and the solution, but not with climate change.

Cheers

Ian

 

[living sounds]

The inconvenient truth is that CO2 makes up a mere .0.04% of the atmosphere. To make it even a slightly viable greenhouse gas the climate catastrophe pundits were forced to invent an (unproven) amplification or positive feedback mechanism which increases its effect tenfold. Even so it is an order of magnitude less effective than plain water vapour which makes up about 4% of the atmosphere.

And yet the warming patterns and extreme weather phenomena predicted by experts for many decades are happening.

The mechanism is more complicated than you assume, but no less valid:

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/07/30/co2-drives-global-warming/

 

[ruffrecords]

And yet the warming patterns and extreme weather phenomena predicted by experts for many decades are happening.

Which may or may not have anything to do with global warming. Read the book by the guy from the University of East Anglia who has analysed the weather patterns of the last 1000 years. From those alone it is possible to predict the weather we are now experiencing. It is part of one of many well known but never mentioned cycles. AGW has nothing to do with it .

The mechanism is more complicated than you assume, but no less valid:

I assume nothing. I merely simplified for your benifit. Once again, this is a theory not a proven mechanism.

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/07/30/co2-drives-global-warming/

Let us get one thing straight. I am not arguing that global worming is not happening. It probably is, as it has been for the last 50,000 years or so. The argument is only about the underlying factors that cause this. There are many but the alarmists only focus on the ones that suit their agenda i.e. it i is mainly due to the CO2 we have created. The only argument that CO2 is to blame is via the models used to predict future climate which include the posited CO2 amplification. But, there is no evidence that this amplification takes place and there is no evidence that the main causes of today's weather are not natural.

Once again, I urge you read around the subject with an open mind so you can understand what you are talking about rather than simply trot out the views of others.

Cheers

Ian

 

[JohnRoberts]

Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters​

by Steven E. Koonin (Hardcover)

I just ordered this book to read so I'll tell you how it turns out, but I don't expect any surprises. Just more positive reinforcement for my expectation bias.

JR

 

[rob_gould]

Which may or may not have anything to do with global warming. Read the book by the guy from the University of East Anglia who has analysed the weather patterns of the last 1000 years. From those alone it is possible to predict the weather we are now experiencing. It is part of one of many well known but never mentioned cycles. AGW has nothing to do with it .

Hi Ian,

Are you talking about Phil Jones?

 

[ruffrecords]

Hi Ian,

Are you talking about Phil Jones?

Sorry, I don't rememeber the guy's name.

Cheers

Ian

 

[shabtek]

is CO2 in water considered 'atmospheric'?
do you think it is a valid metric?

 

[SIXTYNINER]

...Driving a tesla will not change anything but Musk's bank balance.


JR

+ 1

but cars apart ,

any day about 100000 civil aviation flights (... about 4000 only in USA )
(...don't know how many are the military ones )

and "they" want to increase them ,
...less fuel used for cars ?
no problem !!
so much more for aviation ...,

seems to want to reach 40,000,000 air passengers per day
( and what about pandemics ? ..as the world's scientific community already warned )

aviation apart ,
( and fuel trains too..)

how much fuel consume the naval freight transport any day ?

although there are various projects concerning
intercontinental transport by magnetic elevation trains ,
( people , and freight )

from Bering strait to Argentina Land Of Fire
(through alaska , canada, usa, mexico, south america , etc..)

from Bering strait to the "Tip" of Scotland ,
( through Russia and Europe )

with "fishbone" structure transverse lines connected to the main line
by "hubs"
( for people , and freight traffic distribution )
for reach south Afrca , India , China , etc...

... so big projects ?
mission impossible ?
or only investment program issues ?
(..and "who" , must earn money on...)

there is already a related example ,
The Silk Way
from China to Berlin (Germany)
which currently runs with electric and fuel energy
but probably the first which could become magnetically elevated

actually the transport ( people , and freight ) on the Silk Way
require about 5 days against around the 30 days
required by sea cargo

and also the cost is considerably much lower ,

but cars , aviation , sea cargo , etc.. apart

there are also other causes

e.g. the amount of methane and CO2 excreted by cattle reared for milk and meat
which was roughly calculated to be equal to or greater than
that produced by all fossil-fuelled wheeled vehicles
circulating on the planet ...

... and about the number of new installations of air conditioners each year ?
more fresh inside = more hot outside

then more air conditioners ??

( and same for heating the house during winter..)

and more ,
try only to think about the number of new electric and electronic devices that generating heat
( TV , washing machines , hair dryers , dishwashers ,refrigerators , irons , Am-Fm radios & audio devices like Hi-Fi , Computers , Smart Phones , )

have been built, introduced for home and professional use , used every day
in the latest 80 years ,

other more ?

peace.

 

[JohnRoberts]

+ 1

but cars apart ,

any day about 100000 civil aviation flights (... about 4000 only in USA )
(...don't know how many are the military ones )

and "they" want to increase them ,
...less fuel used for cars ?
no problem !!
so much more for aviation ...,

seems to want to reach 40,000,000 air passengers per day

The hypocrisy is palpable when advocates fly their private aircraft to climate conferences.

The industry is working on "greening" up aircraft... aircraft fuel made from reprocessed cooking oil is 2x as expensive. Hydrogen fuel cells and direct combustion of hydrogen are being evaluated (don't they remember the Hindenburg?). There are already short haul battery powered VTOL being evaluated for air taxis connecting to airports. Batteries are heavy so don't support long range.

( and what about pandemics ? ..as the world's scientific community already warned )

aviation apart ,
( and fuel trains too..)

trains are already remarkably fuel efficient and could burn almost any fuel for power.

how much fuel consume the naval freight transport any day ?

There are already laws regulating things like reduced sulphur content in ocean going diesel fuel.

My crazy idea for shipping propulsion is figuring out some way to extract energy from the temperature differential between ocean surface and 50-100' down (I didn't say it was a good idea).

although there are various projects concerning
intercontinental transport by magnetic elevation trains ,
( people , and freight )

maglev trains require energy for the electro magnets.

from Bering strait to Argentina Land Of Fire
(through alaska , canada, usa, mexico, south america , etc..)

from Bering strait to the "Tip" of Scotland ,
( through Russia and Europe )

with "fishbone" structure transverse lines connected to the main line
by "hubs"
( for people , and freight traffic distribution )
for reach south Afrca , India , China , etc...

... so big projects ?
mission impossible ?
or only investment program issues ?
(..and "who" , must earn money on...)

I still wish the big government R&D spending would focus on developing FarUVc LED technology... this could be a game changer for public safety.

there is already a related example ,
The Silk Way

"Silk road".... the rest stop in Afghanistan may be closed for a while. One of the first things the Taliban took over was border crossings and started collecting duty on goods coming in.

from China to Berlin (Germany)
which currently runs with electric and fuel energy
but probably the first which could become magnetically elevated

actually the transport ( people , and freight ) on the Silk Way
require about 5 days against around the 30 days
required by sea cargo

and also the cost is considerably much lower ,

but cars , aviation , sea cargo , etc.. apart

there are also other causes

e.g. the amount of methane and CO2 excreted by cattle reared for milk and meat
which was roughly calculated to be equal to or greater than
that produced by all fossil-fuelled wheeled vehicles
circulating on the planet ...

... and about the number of new installations of air conditioners each year ?
more fresh inside = more hot outside

then more air conditioners ??

( and same for heating the house during winter..)

I like my heat pump that I bought a few years ago.... it uses far less energy than the resistance heat my house was built to use.

and more ,
try only to think about the number of new electric and electronic devices that generating heat
( TV , washing machines , hair dryers , dishwashers ,refrigerators , irons , Am-Fm radios & audio devices like Hi-Fi , Computers , Smart Phones , )

most modern appliances get more efficient with each redesign by using newer technology

have been built, introduced for home and professional use , used every day
in the latest 80 years ,

other more ?

peace.

Peace out...

JR

 

[JohnRoberts]

Hi Ian,

Are you talking about Phil Jones?

There are a number of popular climate books

I just bought the Koonin book (Unsettled).

another:

Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All

Michael Shellenberger

and another:



False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to…

Bjorn Lomborg is well respected AFAIK


The Climate Report: National Climate Assessment-Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation…
U.S. Global Change Research Program

This one looks more favorable to strong government action from reading the notes.

JR

 

[Matador]