Is the USA now a rogue state?

[Brian]

BTW, CO₂ lags temperature for an important reason.

 

The complete lack of curiosity about this detail is striking.

Edited June 12, 2017 by Brian

[Marblehead]

If we all stopped breathing it would significantly lower the CO2 in the atmosphere.

 

[windwalker]

2 hours ago, Brian said:

So I ask again, what is the proper temperature for the Earth?  Seems a critical question if we are going to "get this right."

 lets try this and think about it.

 

 

Edited June 12, 2017 by windwalker

[Jetsun]

2 hours ago, Brian said:

So "we don't know but it's wrong"?

 

Climate scientists have done extensive testing and modelling to know what the earths temperature would be expected to be during this era (without human input) based on past trends and averages. The important point being the temperature rise is above expected averages, the most probable cause being the human input of co2 into the atmosphere. 

 

[Michael Sternbach]

20 minutes ago, Jetsun said:

 

Climate scientists have done extensive testing and modelling to know what the earths temperature would be expected to be during this era (without human input) based on past trends and averages. The important point being the temperature rise is above expected averages, the most probable cause being the human input of co2 into the atmosphere. 

 

 

That and some other gases known to increase the greenhouse effect.

 

"Other greenhouse gases are emitted in smaller quantities, but they trap heat far more effectively than CO₂, and in some cases are thousands of times stronger. Methane is responsible for 17% of man-made global warming, nitrous oxide for 6%."

 

Source:

 

https://ec.europa.eu/clima/change/causes_en

 

[Brian]

29 minutes ago, Jetsun said:

 

Climate scientists have done extensive testing and modelling to know what the earths temperature would be expected to be during this era (without human input) based on past trends and averages. The important point being the temperature rise is above expected averages, the most probable cause being the human input of co2 into the atmosphere. 

 

That all sounds great, Jetsun, except it simply isn't true.

 

The modeling has been both self-serving and wrong.  Over and over, the modelers have made dire predictions and, over and over, have quietly rejiggered the parameters when the predictions have been substantially off-target.  The data clearly show that temperature changes have historically preceded CO₂ changes, not the other way around.  This isn't to say, necessarily, that the current increase in measured atmospheric CO₂ is harmless, or even not that it may contribute to atmospheric warming, but that the data simply don't support this conclusion.  This is truly a case of the cart before the horse on several levels -- first, the data don't support the conclusions (a "scientific method" null hypothesis would make this abundantly clear), second, the dependent and independent variables have clearly been reversed, and, third, the models are being deemed reliable when they obviously are not.  The whole thing stinks.

 

In addition to the entire green surface of the Earth being a CO₂ reprocessing system specifically geared towards converting CO₂ into oxygen, there are quite a number natural CO₂ sinks in the system.  Three of note are plant life (which is also a reprocessing system), glaciers and oceans.  The latter two are particularly significant when discussing the lagging historical relationship between temperature and CO₂ -- unless discussions include these major players and theories/models incorporate them, we are substantially off-base.  The fact that these aspects of the climatic system are conspicuously neglected is just one more strike against the call for urgent action on a poorly understood "crisis."

 

(Note that I am not even getting into the question of whether "global warming" is a good thing or a bad thing, but the historical record is pretty clear here, too -- and it doesn't favor the doomsday-criers...)

Edited June 12, 2017 by Brian

[windwalker]

18 minutes ago, Brian said:

That all sounds great, Jetsun, except it simply isn't true.

 

The modeling has been both self-serving and wrong.  Over and over, the modelers have made dire predictions and, over and over, have quietly rejiggered the parameters when the predictions have been substantially off-target.  The data clearly show that temperature changes have historically preceded CO₂ changes, not the other way around.  This isn't to say, necessarily, that the current increase in measured atmospheric CO₂ is harmless, or even not that it may contribute to atmospheric warming, but that the data simply don't support this conclusion.  This is truly a case of the cart before the horse on several levels -- first, the data don't support the conclusions (a "scientific method" null hypothesis would make this abundantly clear), second, the dependent and independent variables have clearly been reversed, and, third, the models are being deemed reliable when they obviously are not.  The whole thing stinks.

 

In addition to the entire green surface of the Earth being a CO₂ reprocessing system specifically geared towards converting CO₂ into oxygen, there are quite a number natural CO₂ sinks in the system.  Three of note are plant life (which is also a reprocessing system), glaciers and oceans.  The latter two are particularly significant when discussing the lagging historical relationship between temperature and CO₂ -- unless discussions include these major players and theories/models incorporate them, we are substantially off-base.  The fact that these aspects of the climatic system are conspicuously neglected is just one more strike against the call for urgent action on a poorly understood "crisis."

 

(Note that I am not even getting into the question of whether "global warming" is a good thing or a bad thing, but the historical record is pretty clear here, too -- and it doesn't favor the doomsday-criers...)

Slow down Obi Wan, all good stuff.

Need to read it a couple of times to unpack it.

[Michael Sternbach]

20 minutes ago, Brian said:

That all sounds great, Jetsun, except it simply isn't true.

 

The modeling has been both self-serving and wrong.  Over and over, the modelers have made dire predictions and, over and over, have quietly rejiggered the parameters when the predictions have been substantially off-target.  The data clearly show that temperature changes have historically preceded CO₂ changes, not the other way around.  This isn't to say, necessarily, that the current increase in measured atmospheric CO₂ is harmless, or even not that it may contribute to atmospheric warming, but that the data simply don't support this conclusion.  This is truly a case of the cart before the horse on several levels -- first, the data don't support the conclusions (a "scientific method" null hypothesis would make this abundantly clear), second, the dependent and independent variables have clearly been reversed, and, third, the models are being deemed reliable when they obviously are not.  The whole thing stinks.

 

In addition to the entire green surface of the Earth being a CO₂ reprocessing system specifically geared towards converting CO₂ into oxygen, there are quite a number natural CO₂ sinks in the system.  Three of note are plant life (which is also a reprocessing system), glaciers and oceans.  The latter two are particularly significant when discussing the lagging historical relationship between temperature and CO₂ -- unless discussions include these major players and theories/models incorporate them, we are substantially off-base.  The fact that these aspects of the climatic system are conspicuously neglected is just one more strike against the call for urgent action on a poorly understood "crisis."

 

(Note that I am not even getting into the question of whether "global warming" is a good thing or a bad thing, but the historical record is pretty clear here, too -- and it doesn't favor the doomsday-criers...)

 

The role of plant life in processing

CO2 is not being neglected - the incredible deforestation in the industrial age is often mentioned as aggravating the situation.

 

Take that together with the huge amount of fossil fuels burned every day, and the quantity of methane producing livestock bred for satisfying human appetite for meat.

 

Is it really so hard to believe that these long standing and ongoing violations of the planet's eco system would have far reaching consequences?

[windwalker]

11 minutes ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

The role of plant life in processing

CO2 is not being neglected - the incredible deforestation in the industrial age is often mentioned as aggravating the situation.

 

Take that together with the huge amount of fossil fuels burned every day, and the quantity of methane producing livestock bred for satisfying human appetite for meat.

 

Is it really so hard to believe that these long standing and ongoing violations of the planet's eco system would have far reaching consequences?

Violations of the planet's ecosystem ?

Oh my there are lions tigers and bears in the forest. 

 

Are we not part of it. Seems like if we do manage to change it, or it changes  it's just a natural progression of things. 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2017 by windwalker

[Michael Sternbach]

10 minutes ago, windwalker said:

Violations of the planet's ecosystem ?

Oh my there are lions tigers and bears in the forest. 

 

Are we not part of it. Seems like if we do manage to change it, or it changes  it's just a natural progression of things. 

 

 

 

Agreed. What we are watching is a natural part of the ecosystem (us) screwing itself, and a yet bigger part along with it.

 

Lean back and enjoy the show.

Edited June 12, 2017 by Michael Sternbach

[Taomeow]

4 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

Right on the money.  Money being the operative word here.

 

Also interesting how the priests of the church evade this basic math in their sermons:

 

Carbon dioxide ... It occurs naturally in Earth's atmosphere as a trace gas at a concentration of about 0.04 percent (400 ppm) by volume.^[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide#Atmospheric_concentration

 

 

Trace gas Carl. It is not even a component gas, its trace. It is 4 hundredth of a percent right now (0.0004    ). Human CO2 is an absolutely negligible addition to this negligible number. The apocalyptic scares are obviously a lie.

 

What interests me is the believer's psychology. They are not dumb, they can do the math. Why dont they? Its a riddle. My guess is they are hardwired to obey. But I might be wrong, help me out here guys. I am baffled. 
 

 

Oh, they are a spectrum.  At the helm are for-profit believers, for-control believers, for-power believers.   I.e. fake believers, the very creators of the belief.  (An aside for Jetsun: there's a "trace amount" of those in the opposite camp as well -- to refer to your Koch brothers offering.  The war in the depth of the Deep State is not for the climate, humanity, or the future of our children -- most current leaders of Europe don't have any children to begin with , which definitely makes it easier for them to fantasize any which future that serves them personally "right now."  The war is for profit, control, and power.  So pointing out that some of the belief's creators, movers and shakers are at some other movers' and sharers' throat proves only this, and nothing else.  Most corporate whales are "believers."   A few who stand to lose profits from the scam designed to enrich those who concocted it might oppose it.  So what.  Don't look at your own finger pointing at them so selectively.  Look at the moon.)

 

Then there's the hardwired to obey, but mostly I think it's software, not hardware.  Relentless brainwashing, the creation of a fundamentalist religion and the removal of the faculties for critical thinking. 

 

And then there's people who are simply mistaken because they were led astray.  I often voice "dissenting opinions" in the hope that they are the ones who might be listening -- the former two categories are a lost cause.  My hopes may be naive... 

[windwalker]

50 minutes ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

Agreed. What we are watching is a natural part of the ecosystem (us) screwing itself, and a yet bigger part along with it.

 

Lean back and enjoy the show.

I would not say its screwing itself up or that we are helping it to do so,,I would say like the dao it acts according regardless.

doesn't really matter whether we find it convenient or not.

 

 

[Brian]

1 hour ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

The role of plant life in processing

CO2 is not being neglected - the incredible deforestation in the industrial age is often mentioned as aggravating the situation.

 

Take that together with the huge amount of fossil fuels burned every day, and the quantity of methane producing livestock bred for satisfying human appetite for meat.

 

Is it really so hard to believe that these long standing and ongoing violations of the planet's eco system would have far reaching consequences?

So, population control, both in terms of behavior and reproductive rates.

 

Remember me mentioning CRISPR a bit ago?  That wasn't just a random reference.

 

The concern isn't really the Earth's average temperature (since that's well within historical ranges and history also shows both the biosphere and human civilization thrive in periods of relative warmth) but the fact that human population growth is changing things -- too many people, too many cows, too many pigs, too many everything related to people.

 

Hoping for an asteroid, are we?

[Brian]

Familiar with this chart?

 

How about Agenda 21 or the 2030 Agenda?

[Eques Peregrinus]

36 minutes ago, Brian said:

Familiar with this chart?

 

How about Agenda 21 or the 2030 Agenda?

 

Don't worry about world population, Trump and the jihadists have already found a solution. To quote Scott Adams: "There are very few personal problems that cannot be solved through a suitable application of high explosives." 

[Brian]

$166B & counting...

 

https://capitalresearch.org/app/uploads/CRC_ClimateDollars_Study_finalv2.pdf

[Marblehead]

The article is too long so I just looked at the Conclusion.

 

Gotta find more new ways to spend the money that doesn't exist.

 

What's the number that comes after trillion?

 

 

[Brian]

10 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

The article is too long so I just looked at the Conclusion.

 

Gotta find more new ways to spend the money that doesn't exist.

 

What's the number that comes after trillion?

 

 

Brazilian, I think.

[Taomeow]

3 hours ago, Eques Peregrinus said:

 

 To quote Scott Adams: "There are very few personal problems that cannot be solved through a suitable application of high explosives." 

 

Alternatively, they could ban geoengineering.  Oops...  no money in not doing things to the planet.  A much better approach is, fuck it up first, blow it up later.  Works every time. 

[Marblehead]

1 hour ago, Brian said:

Brazilian, I think.

Those are nuts.

 

[Taomeow]

4 hours ago, Brian said:

 

How about Agenda 21 or the 2030 Agenda?

 

Yeah, about that.  I don't think anyone should engage in these discussions before familiarizing themselves thoroughly with this material.  It's like that Chinese proverb -- "locking the doors to prevent robbery when the robbers are already inside the house."  All those heated debates about the best way to lock the doors to "climate change" -- while the real "change" has sneaked up quietly...  as robbers in the night are wont to do...

[Taomeow]

3 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Those are nuts.

 

 

"In Brazil, we don't call them Brazilian nuts.  We call them nuts."  

[Marblehead]

Just now, Taomeow said:

 

"In Brazil, we don't call them Brazilian nuts.  We call them nuts."  

Yeah, but in the USA we have to differentiate between nuts that come from Brazil and those that come from the Cashew Mountains.

 

[ralis]

All of you must have enormous amounts of free time. However, I am spending my time outside in the beautiful high desert mountain scenery and fresh air. 

[Taomeow]

47 minutes ago, ralis said:

All of you must have enormous amounts of free time. However, I am spending my time outside in the beautiful high desert mountain scenery and fresh air.