ralis

First of all Prager U (University) is not a university due to the simple fact that it doesn't hold classes or grant academic degrees. Misrepresentation of this nature is fraudulent. Prager is a right wing propaganda site which is anti-science, denies human caused AGW and produces videos that support authoritarian fascist points of view. Funding by fossil fuel billionaires, the Wilks bros. What a surprise! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_and_Farris_Wilks

Big Ten schools being AAU top tier research institutes are recipients of billions in research money in which there are approximately 50 member schools in the world. It is no surprise that corporations want to get a large slice of that money pie.

I am a liar? To be quite honest, I seriously doubt you have the university coursework to even comment critically on this important subject. Perhaps math and science are not your forte? If not, just admit it. Why not post documentation from your Nobel Prize dude or some other dilettante for review here?

Sea levels are rising in Florida as well as other coastal areas around the planet. Ocean levels are not flat but are asymmetric due to water pressure and affect shorelines differently. https://sealevelrise.org/states/florida/

I see you believing propaganda without any critical analysis which you refuse to state here. Furthermore, Trump is selecting his own dilettantes who are already biased against the initial causes of AGW. Nonlinear dynamic complex systems are sensitive to small initial conditions in which the systematic changes are greater than the initial conditions. E.g, chaos theory by Edward Lorenz or read Steven Strogatz.

I googled the Nobel Prize winner Ivar Giaever and he is tied in with the Mercer's as well as the Heartland Institute. Right wing anti-science funding machines, lest we forget, anti-intellectual. https://www.desmogblog.com/ivar-giaever

Hypocrisy to the max from one who served in the military for 20 plus years and was under government control for the entire time.

Here is Trump's agenda to gaslight the gullible that human activity is irrelevant to AGW. https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/431330-white-house-committee-to-reassess-climate-science-conclusions

You derived your opinion from bogus sources with no analysis of your own except personal opinion. Again your narrative is an appeal to absolute thinking. Furthermore, you are attacking valid research/researchers of which you know nothing about, except what appeals to confirming your bias.

And, all the tax cuts to the extremely wealthy are going right into the markets!

Your narrative is replete with appeals to absolutism. Why? What I read in the above simplistic narrative is a posit of absolutism in order to debunk what you believe is that the scientific method/modeling is based on absolutes. Scientific methodologies are based on probabilities and not absolutes. E.g. probabilities are based on 0-1, 0 defined as impossible and 1 being absolutely certain. 1 has never been defined.

It is a very complex subject in which the rules of complex nonlinear dynamic systems apply. The blog you cut/paste from fails to discuss such basic considerations. BTW, this planetary biosphere does not belong to you and the cabal of AGW deniers alone!!

For any discussion to ensue, are you convinced that CO2 emissions emitted by human activity are the cause of Anthropogenic Global Warming, id est, AGW?

Once again, you are confusing local weather with climate in which the latter is defined by the climatic conditions of the entire biosphere over a period of time, i.e, not one weather event. The blog referred to is not based on research, but propaganda as disseminated by paid shills representing the fossil fuel industry, including the Republican propagandist Frank Luntz. Cut/paste with no comments of your own does not lead to any fruitful discussion here.

Exactly! Frank Luntz's propaganda works. It shocking that most haven't a clue as to where their belief systems BS come from or even question such.

Trump can’t be blamed for the wall? I posted a link from Forbes awhile back and I guess you missed it or are ignoring facts. Alternative facts perhaps. https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2019/01/04/where-the-idea-for-donald-trumps-wall-came-from/#5bb34dec4415

https://nigguraths.wordpress.com/2013/03/19/the-story-of-the-frank-luntz-memo/ Luntz carefully selected focus group participants such that his own bias along with radio personalities such as Limbaugh et al., would be seen as a majority public understanding as opposed to a few right wing propagandists that were already gaslighting the public. Frank Luntz with diverse focus groups. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Frank+Luntz

I am certain you have read Frank Luntz in which he changed the term global warming to climate change. Luntz's work is gaslighting in no uncertain terms! http://web.archive.org/web/20121030085144/http://www.ewg.org/files/LuntzResearch_environment.pdf

You are off topic!!

Here are some references to your query. https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=Arctic+ocean+salt&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

All oceanic life are subject to variations in water temperature, pH and light. Given that ocean waters are carbon sinks, CO2 can lower pH to a slightly more acidic level which means that shell fish will not be able to form shells. Why? Calcium can only be viable for shell formation in a very narrow pH range. If I remember correctly, the melting ice will cool the Atlantic conveyor belt which in time will cease to function.

You keep leaning on natural processes. Define what you mean.

Plants, oceans and soil are carbon sinks with the oceans being the largest. However, one must consider the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere which reflects heat i.e, greenhouse effect and dims light.

2017 published in Nature by Natalia Shakhova, et. al. - why is it NOT in the NOAA report? oops. Any measurements as to the weight of methane bomb releases?

The planetary biosphere is an integrated system in which initial conditions effect the entire system. A non-linear dynamic system is sensitive to initial conditions and effects the entire biosphere. A small reduction effects very little and extreme events continue as well as the methane bomb which will not be contained.