9/18/17 report on overestimation of carbon effect
Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 3:21 pm
MS0qLhqaZDM
Another day in the Universe
https://www.onthenatureofthings.net/forum/
Who told AGW "scientists" about the existence of the sun? did one of them fall asleep on the beach and get a bad sunburn?Nonc Hilaire wrote:I'm amazed there is not a plethora of international forums for posting scientific studies and datasets. The publication racket is antiquated.Typhoon wrote:+1Nonc Hilaire wrote:AGW is a sect of scientism.
It is not the only sect, but perhaps the one that most clearly showcases the difference between scientism and science. It has priests, dogmas, heretics and approved exegesis of sacred texts.
The texts themselves are are promoted or purged by sectarian authorities, and only with great effort can adherents access the texts directly. They must rely upon summaries and derivative surveys of the texts bearing the imprimature of the authorized gatekeepers who enjoy luxurious academic sinecures.
These sinecures are funded by collections are taken up regularly via taxation and subscriptions to authorized publications.
A Reformation is overdue.
And instead of formal, Oxford debates on YouTube we get TedTalks. Ptui.
Conservationists take nine flights a year, despite knowing danger to environment, study shows
Conservationists may preach about the importance of going green to save the planet, but most have a carbon footprint which is virtually no different to anyone else, a new study has shown.
Scientists as Cambridge University were keen to find out whether being fully informed about global warming, plastic in the ocean or the environmental impact of eating meat, triggers more ethical behaviour.
But when they examined the lifestyles of conservation scientists they discovered most still flew frequently – an average of nine flights a year – ate meat or fish approximately five times a week and rarely purchased carbon offsets for their own emissions.
They were also less green in travelling to work than medics, and kept more dogs and cats. A recent study suggested pets are a hefty ecological burden. It takes more than two acres of grazing pasture to keep a medium-sized dog fed with meat, while the eco-footprint of a cat is similar to a Volkswagen Golf.
Beneath Yellowstone National Park lies a supervolcano, a behemoth far more powerful than your average volcano. It has the ability to expel more than 1,000 cubic kilometers of rock and ash at once — 250,000 times more material than erupted from Mount St. Helens in 1980, which killed 57 people. That could blanket most of the United States in a thick layer of ash and even plunge the Earth into a volcanic winter.
the war on meat continues.Plans to expand aquatic farming could have a serious knock-on effect on climate change, climate experts have warned after new research revealed that underwater shellfish farts produce 10% of the global-warming gases released by the Baltic Sea.
Me thinks it is more of an atheist's penis envy of Original Sin.noddy wrote:https://www.euractiv.com/section/climat ... cientists/
the war on meat continues.Plans to expand aquatic farming could have a serious knock-on effect on climate change, climate experts have warned after new research revealed that underwater shellfish farts produce 10% of the global-warming gases released by the Baltic Sea.
Why the list stopped growing.
The time it takes to process a new entry increases approximately with the square of the list length, after checking for duplications, spoofs etc. Starting it was based on the naïve assumption that the rate of appearances would decline as opposing evidence accumulated, but the reverse happened. That’s the difference between science and religion. It was taking over my life, which I did not want to end as a garbage collector. There have since been hundreds more claims of an increasingly ludicrous nature.
That's probably the only defense that would get any traction with the regressive-progressives.Simple Minded wrote: . . .
Have they formulated that Harvey Weinstein's (Wine-steen or Wine-stine?) actions were caused by AGW yet? If not, I call dibbs on the research grant money!
The insects in Germany have been displaced by massive immigration from the Middle East.... obviously..... or AGW!
Simple Minded wrote:
The insects in Germany have been displaced by massive immigration from the Middle East.... obviously..... or AGW!
.
GWPF - The Zimbabwean | Africa and the US question World Bank energy policyIts policy of eco-imperialism forces renewables on a reluctant but largely helpless developing world
HP,Heracleum Persicum wrote:Simple Minded wrote:
The insects in Germany have been displaced by massive immigration from the Middle East.... obviously..... or AGW!
.
Waiting 2C what the moderators say to the above
.
Easy question, not enough Pomegranates!Heracleum Persicum wrote:
O, Lord, what happened to our beloved U.S.of A
Amen
Mark Jacobson, a climate scientist at Stanford University, is suing the National Academy of Sciences and the authors of a paper published in PNAS that criticized his 2015 PNAS study on renewable energy. As The Washington Post reported yesterday (November 1), Jacobson is asking for $10 million and a retraction of the critical report, claiming that the journal and authors knowingly published false statements.
Wonder who offered to pick up the tab for Jacobson's potential legal bills.Using computational simulations, Jacobson’s study determined that the energy grid of the lower 48 states could support an energy supply based entirely on wind, water, and solar energy. But when Clack and his colleagues had a look at the Stanford team’s approach, “we find that their analysis involves errors, inappropriate methods, and implausible assumptions,” they write in their report.
Dude what are you talking about? Concern about global warming correlates positively with broader concern for human impact on the environment. The opposite seems to be true, too: global warming denialism tends to correlate strongly with skeptical -- even hostile -- attitudes toward environmental protection in general. Plenty of examples on this forum, in fact.noddy wrote: i swear that in this day and age of sattelites most global warming folks dont have working eyeballs.
the earth is concrete and grain fields, their is no wilderness anymore - except in mountains, frozen tundras and deserts.
That such policies are easier to enact on the weaker, developing world is no more or less just than wealthy people having access to lifestyle- and health-enhancing goods and services before the poor do. The same people decrying the former will foam at the mouth and label you a Marxist for pointing out the latter. The planet is more important than the base aspirations of humans, including poor ones. The fair thing to do would be to begin imposing sensible energy policies on the developed world, too. Global birth rationing would not be a bad idea, either.Typhoon wrote:The Spectator | How the World Bank [helps to] keeps poor nations poor
GWPF - The Zimbabwean | Africa and the US question World Bank energy policyIts policy of eco-imperialism forces renewables on a reluctant but largely helpless developing world
Well, you're hardly the first person to believe that he knows what is best for everyone else and to suggest that draconian measures be imposed because of some imminent, yet ever receding, imaginary crisis.Zack Morris wrote:That such policies are easier to enact on the weaker, developing world is no more or less just than wealthy people having access to lifestyle- and health-enhancing goods and services before the poor do. The same people decrying the former will foam at the mouth and label you a Marxist for pointing out the latter. The planet is more important than the base aspirations of humans, including poor ones. The fair thing to do would be to begin imposing sensible energy policies on the developed world, too. Global birth rationing would not be a bad idea, either.Typhoon wrote:The Spectator | How the World Bank [helps to] keeps poor nations poor
GWPF - The Zimbabwean | Africa and the US question World Bank energy policyIts policy of eco-imperialism forces renewables on a reluctant but largely helpless developing world
Zack Morris wrote:.
Wildlife populations have been decimated by humans and many species survive only thanks to government support.
.
Certainly. Given people the freedom to make their own decisions with the role of government to ensure a fair playing field, not to pick winner and losers by the criteria of the day.Zack Morris wrote:Perhaps you can tell me who knows best? Do you have any constructive ideas on global governance?
It's not a binary choice: no government or dictatorship by you.Zack Morris wrote:I'm not aware of any society past or present that simply left people to their own devices.
So you claim by assertion. Your unsupported opinion is worth exactly bupkes.Zack Morris wrote:Contrary to your house-of-cards arguments on these topics,
There are real environmental problems: deforestation, loss and fragmentation of biospheres, over fishing,Zack Morris wrote:The world faces numerous environmental threats and the warning signs are pretty clear by now.
Some have, others thrive.Zack Morris wrote:Wildlife populations have been decimated by humans and many species survive only thanks to government support.
I think in the past this was called "imperialism".Zack Morris wrote: That such policies are easier to enact on the weaker, developing world is no more or less just than wealthy people having access to lifestyle- and health-enhancing goods and services before the poor do. The same people decrying the former will foam at the mouth and label you a Marxist for pointing out the latter. The planet is more important than the base aspirations of humans, including poor ones. The fair thing to do would be to begin imposing sensible energy policies on the developed world, too. Global birth rationing would not be a bad idea, either.
Anyone but leftist.Zack Morris wrote:Perhaps you can tell me who knows best?
Every doomsday prediction I know of concerning the environment has failed. Every single one.Do you have any constructive ideas on global governance? I'm not aware of any society past or present that simply left people to their own devices. Contrary to your house-of-cards arguments on these topics, the world faces numerous environmental threats and the warning signs are pretty clear by now. Wildlife populations have been decimated by humans and many species survive only thanks to government support.