Climate Change

[Stosh]

23 minutes ago, joeblast said:

oh no, I was just playing taps for AGW   because if that theory is correct, then by 2040 we will absolutely see the carbon dioxide catastrophe conjecture long since laughed out of academia

As I read it , they show excellent correlation between the sunspots and the isotopes , but the correlation looks weaker for global temperatures. If there is a problem with lots of CO2 , I think its in 'acidification' of ocean water. A theory proposed about the sun activity , it hat it has a greater effect than just that of decreased insolation , there is also a change in atmospheric albedo. So a spike in co2 might mitigate some of the effects , or exacerbate them. Dunno , but what we should all see is that there are natural changes and cycles , that change is constant , that the earth moderates itself ,and life plays a part in that. 

We haven't got the science nailed down , so to me -it makes sense to do some things like reforestation , terra-optimizing, cleaning up the mess and so forth,  which generate ecological benefit,  regardless of whether its going to shift the climatic cycles.  It doesn't have to be painful at all , there just needs to be political responsiveness. 

Edited July 11, 2019 by Stosh

[MooNiNite]

20 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

2) Are you willing to invest in nuclear energy, despite the known long term issue with radioactive waste containment, in order to halt the immediate threat posed by CO2? [This is analogous to a person who is starving and you offer him food, but the food may give him diabetes in 10 years. Without the food he will be dead in a week, so it's pointless to refuse]. (Yes/No)

 

 

 

Actually we can build Thormium reactors where the waste only has a life span of 300 years and they are protected from a nuclear melt down so the environment wont get destroyed.

 

You can power the world on thorium without opening a single mine, because it is already plentiful.

 

 

 

[Lost in Translation]

Nu-cu-lar!

 

Because, Science!

 

Spoiler

 

 

[MooNiNite]

Thorium reactors cant melt down like nuclear reactors. 

[Nintendao]

[Stosh]

46 minutes ago, MooNiNite said:

Thorium reactors cant melt down like nuclear reactors. 

This is just so incredibly reasonable I am looking for the reason why it hasn't replaced everything else yet.

It potentially produces enough energy to remove CO2 from the atmosphere to make substitute fossil fuel , which would be carbon neutral. 

[Dynasty]

1 hour ago, MooNiNite said:

Actually we can build Thormium reactors where the waste only has a life span of 300 years and they are protected from a nuclear melt down so the environment wont get destroyed.

 

Are they safe enough that small scale power production could be feasible?  Maybe large enough to illuminate a remote mountain village of 300 people.

 

Or a new subdivision with 300 new homes being constructed?

Edited July 11, 2019 by Dynasty

[Pilgrim]

25 minutes ago, Stosh said:

This is just so incredibly reasonable I am looking for the reason why it hasn't replaced everything else yet.

It potentially produces enough energy to remove CO2 from the atmosphere to make substitute fossil fuel , which would be carbon neutral. 

Follow the money trail. Right now from what I understand multiple small reactors spread out rather than huge plants are the way things are going now.

[Stosh]

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) built and operated the first molten salt reactor (MSR) in the late 1960s. It was a 7.4-megawatt (thermal) test unit, and its design was being considered for a nuclear-powered bomber. Terrestrial Energy's reactor is based on ORNL's denatured MSR design.

 

Terrestrial's MSR is a modular design, able to range from 80 megawatts to 600 megawatts, and targeted at remote, military, or industrial sites, both on- and off-grid.

Using the small modular reactor (SMR) concept, reactors can be built in factories and shipped to the site already constructed, rather than being built -- expensively and riskily -- on site. Rather than engineer and build reactors capable of producing more than 1 gigawatt of electric power, SMRs can produce 10 megawatts to 6,000 megawatts of electricity (or heat).

 

Megawatt: One megawatt equals one million watts, or 1,000 kilowatts, roughly enough electricity for the instantaneous demand of 750 homes at once. That number fluctuates (some say one megawatt is enough for 1,000 homes) because electrical demand changes based on the season, the time of day, and other factors.

 

[joeblast]

here's another something for ralis to declare that Science has successfully ignored and doesnt need to be considered much in modeling   (I mean really, the IPCC already said it doesnt have time for clouds, so why bother with them)

 

 

 

Quote

 

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

NO EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE FOR THE SIGNIFICANT ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGE

J. KAUPPINEN AND P. MALMI

Abstract.

In this paper we will prove that GCM-models used in IPCC reportAR5 fail to calculate the influences of the low cloud cover changes on the global temperature. That is why those models give a very small natural temperature change leaving a very large change for the contribution of the green house gases in the observed temperature. This is the reason why IPCC has to use a very large sensitivity to compensate a too small natural component. Further they have to leave out the strong negative feedback due to the clouds in order to magnify the sensitivity. In addition, this paper proves that the changes in the low cloud cover fraction practically control the global temperature.

 

 

 

stating the painfully obvious (but they could have done a better job with datasourcing this paper,)

"If we pay attention to the fact that only a small part of the increased CO2 concentration is anthropogenic, we have to recognize that the anthropogenic climate change does not exist in practice," the researchers conclude. 

 

Quote

 

MAJOR FEEDBACK FACTORS AND EFFECTS OF THE CLOUDCOVER AND THE RELATIVE HUMIDITY ON THE CLIMATE

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1812.11547.pdf

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

Geological support for the Umbrella Effect as a link between geomagnetic field and climate

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep40682

 

 

Quote

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225354156_Global_Cloud_Cover_and_the_Earth's_Mean_Surface_Temperature

 

 

Quote

The IPCC itself acknowledges that GCMs can’t actually model clouds, so they’re “parameterized”. That means their effects can be whatever the Planet GIGO computer gamers want or need them to be.

 

 

when you take the physics (i.e. the fundamentals) based approach, you're simply not really left with much room

https://www.scribd.com/document/414175992/CO21

 

 

 

 

 

cuz academia is just as rife with fraud and trash as corps are

Quote

 

Joe Biden also earned about $370,000 in 2017 and about $405,000 in 2018 from being a professor at the University of Pennsylvania. Jill Biden continued teaching at Northern Virginia Community College in those years.

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/452259-biden-releases-tax-returns-showing-steep-rise-in-income

 

and sellouts will sell out their fellow human being so they can have a position, or money, or worse things

Edited July 12, 2019 by joeblast

[voidisyinyang]

On 7/11/2019 at 7:49 AM, joeblast said:

you're basically conflating banksterism with the entirety of western civilization. 

New interview with Dr. Peter Wadhams who has studied ice thickness in the Arctic - with over 50 trips there. He points out that the computer models are not keeping up with the reality of abrupt global warming and that all of industrial civilization is the problem. He says the arctic will be ice free in a year or two and then mass famine will kick in.

 

[joeblast]

4 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

New interview with Dr. Peter Wadhams who has studied ice thickness in the Arctic - with over 50 trips there. He points out that the computer models are not keeping up with the reality of abrupt global warming and that all of industrial civilization is the problem. He says the arctic will be ice free in a year or two and then mass famine will kick in.

 

yes, no matter what, its always worse....if its not worse here, we'll find somewhere to measure where we can claim its worse...

 

damn that co2   and damn that ocean heat doing 100% of everything to the jet stream, its all co2's fault, cuz the sun is static enough that the subtle variations can be ignored, Hansen even said so

 

its pretty clear that until solar events 'outlier' enough, the bankster propagandized climate zealots will continue to focus on anything that can be utilized and completely ignore all contrary data and keep pushing for those carbon taxes to benefit the .0000001%

 

and once the sun does outlier enough, the excuses will continue until the conjecture is laughed at by all

 

now, I'm not saying that some observations are incorrect, e.g. my travels to alaska over the years I saw "how far" the mendenhall receded since I first went there in the early 80s, but it doesnt mean that industry did it.  this guy is full of shit saying "industry did all of this" and has conjecture to back it up, which was why it deserved to be laughed at.

 

stop supporting bankster terrorism - which includes eco terrorism - you may think you're protesting for the planet, but really you're just giving assistance to the biggest of the biggest of the frauds on the planet.

Edited July 17, 2019 by joeblast

[voidisyinyang]

On 7/12/2019 at 1:56 PM, joeblast said:

here's another something for ralis to declare that Science has successfully ignored and doesnt need to be considered much in modeling   (I mean really, the IPCC already said it doesnt have time for clouds, so why bother with them)

 

Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes ...

 

https://climatefeedback.org/.../non-peer-reviewed-manuscript-falsely-claims-natural-cl...

Claim: During the last hundred years the temperature is increased about 0.1°C because of carbon dioxide. The human contribution was about 0.01°C.

Claimed by: Jyrki Kauppinen, Pekka Malmi, Paul Joseph Watson

debunked.

https://climatefeedback.org/claimreview/non-peer-reviewed-manuscript-falsely-claims-natural-cloud-changes-can-explain-global-warming/

[joeblast]

1 hour ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

Timothy Osborn, Professor, University of East Anglia, and Director of Research, Climatic Research Unit:

 

  Wow, went straight to one of the hearts of the malfeasance for that one!

 

it is amusing seeing the kneejerk recoiling when a more holistic idea is presented that doesnt finger humans (gotta have that tax, have you figured out that this is all about the potential tax revenues yet?)

 

the criticisms about explaining how they got their result is valid of course, they didnt do a very good job at that.  but its basically that + "you didnt agree with us, this is bullshit" and if you cant recognize that this is a purposeful hit piece clearly intended to be as dismissive as possible....well, ya just might have an attachment to a conjecture   they might as well have directly said "this isnt sourced properly, so this matter should never, ever be looked at, ever again - the science is settled, remember?"

 

 

still doesnt change that cornfields can easily suck co2 below the meter on a windless day

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00103624.2018.1448413

 

and the models being utilized to make predictions - like Mark Richardson said in the hit piece - Climate models simplify and apply the laws of physics to calculate Earth’s climate - their creators dont like having more holistic theories put forth, it messes with the co2bad conjecture.

 

Spoiler

 

cuz if co2bad proven, then yay new tranche of tax revenues for governments to piss away, another stone tossed upon the backs up the populace to help the homeless from becoming the poor, the poor from being the lower class, the lower class having that welfare bridge to surpass, helps keep the middle class from being upper class - and the fraud required helps keep the owners at the top controlling it all.

 

it makes one wonder how they would have spun the upcoming solar minimum if the frauds had succeeded in stealing the 16 election and pretty much closed the door on the Earth ever being honest ever again, lol...they would have called up their friends at East Anglia to help out with some contrivance that sounded plausible, lol!

 

 

 

but really, the co2 conjecture is more akin to Einstein trying to solve the equations of the universe while at the same time rejecting quantum mechanics as spooky and odd, even though it kept proving itself

 

 

which gets us back to prediction - well, we've been hearing about ice free arctic forever, and each year we hear its catastrophic, and each year there's never anything that's out of whack from a periodicity's standpoint.   each time we get a certain precisely chosen set of graphs to explain why this year's the worst ever for the conditions, while all of the short-medium term predictions arent even coming anywhere near close to being true....which makes the long term predictions just right out

 

 

"look here, not over there"

 

 

 

I thought it was really cool when nat geo had that bit on the jupiter flyby and they had the pictures from Io, being twisted by Jupiter

 

 

the hemispheres are more out of sync now than in our lifetimes if not longer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and dont look here, where other criticisms of IPCC assumptions are, lol

Quote

“IPCC has used in their estimations for example the results of the paper “Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Given Distribution of Relative Humidity” by Syukuro Manabe and Richard T. Wetherald [12]. The authors have used in their calculations a heat capacity of air as a heat capacity of the whole atmosphere. The heat capacity of the mere air is about 10 MJ/m2K. However, in a correct calculation we have to use the capacities 10.8 MJ/m2K over land and 325 MJ/m2K over ocean. They have not added the heat capacity of a thin layer of the ground over land and the mixing layer (75 m) of the ocean. Taking into account the fact that the earth consists of 29 % land and 71 % ocean we can estimate the effective heat capacity of the whole climate. It is about 60 MJ/m2K or six times bigger than the value used by Manabe et al. …”

 

“… Because they have used only the sixth part of the real heat capacity they obtained six times bigger sensitivity.”

which winds up meaning that we must necessarily put co2 in its place

Edited July 17, 2019 by joeblast
there's just all KINDS of stuff that "arent inputs to climate models" that affect what's going on

[voidisyinyang]

7 hours ago, joeblast said:

  Wow, went straight to one of the hearts of the malfeasance for that one!

 

it is amusing seeing the kneejerk recoiling when a more holistic idea is presented that doesnt finger humans (gotta have that tax, have you figured out that this is all about the potential tax revenues yet?)

 

the criticisms about explaining how they got their result is valid of course, they didnt do a very good job at that.  but its basically that + "you didnt agree with us, this is bullshit" and if you cant recognize that this is a purposeful hit piece clearly intended to be as dismissive as possible....well, ya just might have an attachment to a conjecture   they might as well have directly said "this isnt sourced properly, so this matter should never, ever be looked at, ever again - the science is settled, remember?"

 

 

still doesnt change that cornfields can easily suck co2 below the meter on a windless day

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00103624.2018.1448413

 

and the models being utilized to make predictions - like Mark Richardson said in the hit piece - Climate models simplify and apply the laws of physics to calculate Earth’s climate - their creators dont like having more holistic theories put forth, it messes with the co2bad conjecture.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

cuz if co2bad proven, then yay new tranche of tax revenues for governments to piss away, another stone tossed upon the backs up the populace to help the homeless from becoming the poor, the poor from being the lower class, the lower class having that welfare bridge to surpass, helps keep the middle class from being upper class - and the fraud required helps keep the owners at the top controlling it all.

 

it makes one wonder how they would have spun the upcoming solar minimum if the frauds had succeeded in stealing the 16 election and pretty much closed the door on the Earth ever being honest ever again, lol...they would have called up their friends at East Anglia to help out with some contrivance that sounded plausible, lol!

 

 

 

but really, the co2 conjecture is more akin to Einstein trying to solve the equations of the universe while at the same time rejecting quantum mechanics as spooky and odd, even though it kept proving itself

 

 

which gets us back to prediction - well, we've been hearing about ice free arctic forever, and each year we hear its catastrophic, and each year there's never anything that's out of whack from a periodicity's standpoint.   each time we get a certain precisely chosen set of graphs to explain why this year's the worst ever for the conditions, while all of the short-medium term predictions arent even coming anywhere near close to being true....which makes the long term predictions just right out

 

 

"look here, not over there"

 

 

 

I thought it was really cool when nat geo had that bit on the jupiter flyby and they had the pictures from Io, being twisted by Jupiter

 

 

the hemispheres are more out of sync now than in our lifetimes if not longer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and dont look here, where other criticisms of IPCC assumptions are, lol

which winds up meaning that we must necessarily put co2 in its place

This threads obviously too long for you - you need to go back and read the whole thread as you're repeating debunked claims again. NIce try though.

 

[Lost in Translation]

You know that story of the boy who cried 'wolf?' Well, climate change alarmists have been screaming that 'we only have ten years to do something' for half a century. 'Doing something' always involves an exchange of money and political power, always from those with money and power to those without it. After hearing the same warnings again and again, and watching nothing come of it I just don't believe it anymore.

 

[Lost in Translation]

Wake me up when Orlando is actually under water or when the ice caps actually disappear. Until then I got better things to do.

Edited July 17, 2019 by Lost in Translation

[windwalker]

1 hour ago, Lost in Translation said:

Wake me up when Orlando is actually under water or when the ice caps actually disappear. Until then I got better things to do.

 

 

C U when you get there

 

 

Edited July 18, 2019 by windwalker

[joeblast]

14 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

This threads obviously too long for you - you need to go back and read the whole thread as you're repeating debunked claims again. NIce try though.

 

Sorry homes, but "debunked by the conjecture" doesnt really quite cut it - like I said - wait till all the perverted Bankster money is out of Climate Science - by then, we'll if Dr Zharkova is correct or not, and right around then is when the discussions will begin about putting the conjecture to bed once and for all. 

 

The ONE legitimate criticism was the methods used, making it a sort of black box.....but hey, black boxes are ok and acceptable when they help nudge things for the conjecture, like when its NASA GISS or something modeling the arctic or antarctic completely wacked we're talking about, right?    Those black boxes are ok because James Hansen is beyond reproach and is a steadfast soldier for the cause, and he'd never ever do anything untoward like try to convince the public that the Sun is not the primary driver of the climate system

 

AGW Climate Conjecture began a long time ago and the majority of the efforts are geared towards "we werent wrong this whole time" at this point - with so much assumption baked into an incomplete model, comparing reality to the fantasy...lol....yeah, when the fantasy is all their is, of course its easy to say "this doesnt agree with the conjecture - DEBUNKED!"  Which is all Pal Review has done for 25-30 years running.  Perverted Bankster money makes men do wacky things they otherwise wouldnt.

 

I've known for the entirety of the last 4 climate threads I'm dealing with a zealot that absolutely will not be convinced the conjecture is false no matter what, and I'll bet a hundred bucks I'll be sitting here after Dr Zharkova is being proven correct more and more to the point of the model being generally accepted and you'll still be sitting here talking about your experience you had in 2000 and how we're really all doomed, just wait its gonna happen - one of the polynyas out there is bigger than last year - see, ice coming back is crazy, its lowest ever still!  Its gonna be ice free any year now!!!

 

Maybe if Dr Zharkova's model is correct and the sun picks back up around 2600    But once again a model's predictions that are driven by a third order trace gas...hahahaha....yeah, we just dont see people actually putting their own money on those bets, we only see progressive politicians putting the public's money on it.  (or billionaires that have already done their suckling.)  Revealing once again that AGW is not really about science, it is about Banksters keeping Plebes down.

 

Edited July 18, 2019 by joeblast

[voidisyinyang]

2 hours ago, joeblast said:

Sorry homes,

 

wow you studied Ebonics?

Quote

This trend is anticipated to continue in the next six centuries that can lead to a further natural increase of the terrestrial temperature by more than 2.5 °C by 2600.

Here's your "model" that you "buy"

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333988067_Oscillations_of_the_baseline_of_solar_magnetic_field_and_solar_irradiance_on_a_millennial_timescale

now here's my model:

http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2019/07/most-important-message-ever.html

 

Quote

When looking at how much hotter June 2019 was compared to the annual global mean 1980-2015, it was 2.08°C (or 3.74°F) hotter, which was partly due to seasonal variations, as the image below shows.

 

from Dr. Carmen Solana posing as Sam Carana

Quote

While the long-term trend points at a 3°C (or 5.4°F) rise by 2026, a 3°C rise could eventuate as early as in 2020 in case of a persistently strengthening El Niño.

now back to your model:

oops - Zarkova long been debunked....

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/jan/09/the-imminent-mini-ice-age-myth-is-back-and-its-still-wrong

 

 

Quote

Ilya Usoskin, head of the Oulu Cosmic Ray Station and Vice-Director of the ReSoLVE Center of Excellence in Research, published a critique of Zharkova’s solar model making those points. Most importantly, the model fails in reproducing past known solar activity because Zharkova’s team treats the sun as a simple, predictable system like a pendulum. In reality, the sun has more random and unpredictable (in scientific terms, “stochastic”) behavior:

 

and yet?

 

Quote

 

Why won’t this myth die?

Zharkova believes her solar model is correct, but at best it can only try to predict when the next quiet solar period will occur. Its influence on Earth’s climate is outside her expertise, and the peer-reviewed research is clear that it would be a minimal impact.

Zharkova disagrees – I contacted her, and she told me that she believes a grand solar minimum would have a much bigger cooling effect. However, she also referenced long-debunked myths about global warming on Mars and Jupiter, and made a comment about “the preachers of global warming.” She’s clearly passionate about her research, and has the credibility that comes with publishing peer-reviewed studies on solar activity. Perhaps these factors motivate journalists to write these frequent ‘mini ice age’ stories.

But Zharkova’s climate science beliefs are irrelevant. While she has created a model predicting an imminent period of quiet solar activity, other scientists have identified serious flaws in the model, and in any case, research has shown that another solar minimum would only have a small and temporary impact on Earth’s climate.

 

 

Edited July 18, 2019 by voidisyinyang

[joeblast]

Hehe, a(nother) new gloom and doom graph that "proves" we're all dead and we just dont know it yet.  They're looking prettier but when the science behind it is altered by money to obtain a predetermined result...GIGO, Drew....GIGO.  The biggest irony is that its the exact same Rules For Radicals tactic used against Big Oil to dismiss every argument that doesnt agree with the conjecture.  Big Oil funded stuff can be ignored thusly - for the zealots that cant use data in their arguments like ralis, that's the go-to when presented with data or conclusions that the zealots dont want to see.  The Progressives loves them their Alinsky.  Bodysnatchers-point and ig-nore!

 

 

lol and poor Docta Solana...you mean all we need is a runaway unstoppable ever increasing En Nino and then the conjecture will be right?  What a hoot, the shit people come up with!

 

 

Looky that, lack of sunspots and the polar vortex stalled again and we have a flat line across the USA and huge heat.  Ah, more opportunity for the conjecture to conflate cause and effect!  Maybe its that persistent el nino, hahaha.  These variations are all human driven, of course, cuz damn that co2     Muh warmest evah!  Every year, new records for warmest evah, and we'll keep making sure it shows warmest evah, evah-ry year until those Carbon Taxes are implemented!

 

I dunno, to me its both really sad and funny at what you'll ignore while you're leaning way over the side of the boat with nothing but fishing line keeping you from falling into the water   You're just riding 30 years of tainted assumptions and treating unproven as proven and we just have to uphold what's "proven"...except it hasnt been proven in the least and its only bad statistics that formed the foundation to begin with.

 

Really, this reminds me of allopathic medicine that either tosses harsh drugs at something or cuts it out comepletely and that's about the extent of it....all the while poo pooing more holistic looks at the body....yeah, we have the same situation here where the "greenhouse" is all that's to be worried about and damn everything else - nevermind all that woodoo holistic look at the situation, we've found our tax inroad!  I mean...uh...wait, its not about taxes, honest! 

 

Now...I guess this is where you go and bring up some more noise in poor context to attempt to prove the conjecture again? *chuckles*

Edited July 18, 2019 by joeblast

[Lost in Translation]

3 hours ago, joeblast said:

we just dont see people actually putting their own money on those bets, we only see progressive politicians putting the public's money on it.  (or billionaires that have already done their suckling.) 

 

BINGO!

 

Can anyone name a single prominent person (politician, celebrity,  etc) who has sold their beachfront property for fear of climate change?

 

Anyone...?

[joeblast]

1 hour ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

BINGO!

 

Can anyone name a single prominent person (politician, celebrity,  etc) who has sold their beachfront property for fear of climate change?

 

Anyone...?

its part of the corporate theft model - subsidies go to wind up helping the politically favored all too often, which was something that was also going into overdrive under the Obama admin.  hw & bubba were just stomach blows, dubya was a strong one to the side of the head, Obama was a liver shot and hillary would have landed right on the jawbone of america as the globalists pivoted to china and let the usa languish in its fantastic debt and neutered industrial capacity, well on its way to idiocracy levels of general intellect under the Progressive banner.

Edited July 18, 2019 by joeblast

[voidisyinyang]

4 hours ago, joeblast said:

 

lol and poor Docta Solana...you mean all we need is a runaway unstoppable ever increasing En Nino and then the conjecture will be right?  What a hoot, the shit people come up with!

 

 

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2019/03/14/520626.htm

Quote

Mar 14, 2019 - El Niño conditions, however, strengthened during February 2019, as above-average sea surface temperatures increased across the equatorial ...

the shit insurance journals come up with!

hahaha. Dude - watch out - the real world might sneak up on you!

[joeblast]

I can appreciate the flow of causality, so not worried