Just wondering but how long will you "keep believeing" in AGW if the actual data continues to fail to match the predictions or in fact, contradicts them? From the best data I have been able to find it looks like there has been at least a 15 or 20 year pause in warming and, recently, a bit of a downturn in global temperatures. Meanwhile global CO2 concentrations continue to climb. Is there any point at which you will agree that the theory of AGW has ben falsified or are you completely locked in? IMHO, given the alternatives, global satellite temperatures beginning in 1979 are, by far, the most accurate reconrd of temperatures. One must, I believe, settle on what record one believes to be most accurate as a starting point and, for my money, sattelites are, hands down, the best we have.
If that is the case then for all intents and purposes there has been very little and possibly no warming since inception of the record. If one examines the records at the bottom of the page which record the average temps for different slices of the atmosphere monthly one finds that annual and decadal variability overwhelms any warming we might perceive. It is not uncommon to see a .4C variance within a 12 month period globally and during decade scale measurements a variance of .6 to .7C is not uncommon, it is more the norm. I'm just a layman but I do know how to read a thermometer. I have lived on this planet quite a bit longer than you and my carreer causes me to pay close attention to temperatures on a daily basis over my region. I have, because of the disconnect between what I have experienced and what I read we are experiencing, widened my examination to this continent. Sorry, but I don't see evidence af actual warming of any significance. Just wondered what it would take for you to see the same thing?
If you continue to be even half as good as these first few posts, you will be one of my favorite writers on the internet. I love every paragraph, and look forward to the footnotes.
A propos of the 'we're all f***ed and there's no solution' people I recently spoke to someone who thinks property & money will be worthless within 50 years. Because climate collapse will lead to societal breakdown. And a propos of the denialists, a guy I used to work with keeps posting on LinkedIn that the climate has always swung between hot & cold. My best friend is an academic in sustainability & thinks that business will sort it out. I'm calling his position the technopopimist view.
These rats ARE getting rich of this hysteria-al Gore took something from the 70's and copied it, in the early 2000's his INCONVENIENT TRUTH movie was shown in class rooms and said that cities would be underwater by 2012 or so- Complete trash, worse , scaring kids with this sick fallacy, when it failed he kept trying. Then inventing the CARBON CREDIT SCAM- Making him and all the criminals with him billions. China is the biggest pollution emitter in the world, but they are NEVER brought up by media- The biggest problem is poison in our environment, again china directly discharges noxious, toxic, untreated, cancer causing chemicals into rivers,streams,ETC. Plastic dumping, & other garbage, another big problem. Earths climate has changed so many times, NOBODY KNOWS for sure what and how extreme the changes have been. Stating that ONLY CARBON levels are the cause of EVERYTHING is profit driven madness. I did not read the entire article, But the VACCINES ARE killing enormous amounts of people. One more thing FUSION is closer than you think HELLION FUSION will have a net positive small sized, low complexity , pulse fusion reactors, by 2024. Hopefully the oil business will not meddle with this TEC. because when people stop using OIL the middle east will become a powder keg.- Yes plastics & other petro chems will be Necessary, for now at least.
You lost me at (climate change is) "the biggest problem in the world." It's not even among my top five. but climate change as a superstitious religion is among my top three. And no, it is not reasonable to conclude that climate change is being caused by humans, which is an unreasonable, irrational and unscientific conclusion. Humans did not create the climate, and ultimately we can neither destroy it or keep it from changing. We should be good stewards of all on the planet that God has given us, but we must not fall victim to our own delusions of grandeur. A century from now, when we look back and see that there has been very little change in the climate—at least, no changes which were under our control—we will wonder why and how our ancestors managed to spend so much time, money and effort trying to solve something that was not really a problem, at the expense of real human needs and dilemmas.
The status quoists remind me so much of right-wing opposition to sensible gun-safety measures. The nitpicking is the same rhetorical move--this one measure won’t solve everything, so let’s forget the whole thing. I wish I could convince my friends on the left who are opposed to nuclear power and carbon capture of this.
Incidentally, I have heard some climate alarmists begin to dial it back just a bit. Ezra Klein and even David Wallace Wells are noting that the worst predictions from ten years ago are already not coming true.
Just wondering but how long will you "keep believeing" in AGW if the actual data continues to fail to match the predictions or in fact, contradicts them? From the best data I have been able to find it looks like there has been at least a 15 or 20 year pause in warming and, recently, a bit of a downturn in global temperatures. Meanwhile global CO2 concentrations continue to climb. Is there any point at which you will agree that the theory of AGW has ben falsified or are you completely locked in? IMHO, given the alternatives, global satellite temperatures beginning in 1979 are, by far, the most accurate reconrd of temperatures. One must, I believe, settle on what record one believes to be most accurate as a starting point and, for my money, sattelites are, hands down, the best we have.
If that is the case then for all intents and purposes there has been very little and possibly no warming since inception of the record. If one examines the records at the bottom of the page which record the average temps for different slices of the atmosphere monthly one finds that annual and decadal variability overwhelms any warming we might perceive. It is not uncommon to see a .4C variance within a 12 month period globally and during decade scale measurements a variance of .6 to .7C is not uncommon, it is more the norm. I'm just a layman but I do know how to read a thermometer. I have lived on this planet quite a bit longer than you and my carreer causes me to pay close attention to temperatures on a daily basis over my region. I have, because of the disconnect between what I have experienced and what I read we are experiencing, widened my examination to this continent. Sorry, but I don't see evidence af actual warming of any significance. Just wondered what it would take for you to see the same thing?
https://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
If you continue to be even half as good as these first few posts, you will be one of my favorite writers on the internet. I love every paragraph, and look forward to the footnotes.
A propos of the 'we're all f***ed and there's no solution' people I recently spoke to someone who thinks property & money will be worthless within 50 years. Because climate collapse will lead to societal breakdown. And a propos of the denialists, a guy I used to work with keeps posting on LinkedIn that the climate has always swung between hot & cold. My best friend is an academic in sustainability & thinks that business will sort it out. I'm calling his position the technopopimist view.
A very interesting read, you sound just like our Grandson so I am forwarding your post to him as I am sure he would enjoy it
A very interesting read, you sound just like our Grandson so I am forwarding your post to him as I am sure he would enjoy it
These rats ARE getting rich of this hysteria-al Gore took something from the 70's and copied it, in the early 2000's his INCONVENIENT TRUTH movie was shown in class rooms and said that cities would be underwater by 2012 or so- Complete trash, worse , scaring kids with this sick fallacy, when it failed he kept trying. Then inventing the CARBON CREDIT SCAM- Making him and all the criminals with him billions. China is the biggest pollution emitter in the world, but they are NEVER brought up by media- The biggest problem is poison in our environment, again china directly discharges noxious, toxic, untreated, cancer causing chemicals into rivers,streams,ETC. Plastic dumping, & other garbage, another big problem. Earths climate has changed so many times, NOBODY KNOWS for sure what and how extreme the changes have been. Stating that ONLY CARBON levels are the cause of EVERYTHING is profit driven madness. I did not read the entire article, But the VACCINES ARE killing enormous amounts of people. One more thing FUSION is closer than you think HELLION FUSION will have a net positive small sized, low complexity , pulse fusion reactors, by 2024. Hopefully the oil business will not meddle with this TEC. because when people stop using OIL the middle east will become a powder keg.- Yes plastics & other petro chems will be Necessary, for now at least.
You lost me at (climate change is) "the biggest problem in the world." It's not even among my top five. but climate change as a superstitious religion is among my top three. And no, it is not reasonable to conclude that climate change is being caused by humans, which is an unreasonable, irrational and unscientific conclusion. Humans did not create the climate, and ultimately we can neither destroy it or keep it from changing. We should be good stewards of all on the planet that God has given us, but we must not fall victim to our own delusions of grandeur. A century from now, when we look back and see that there has been very little change in the climate—at least, no changes which were under our control—we will wonder why and how our ancestors managed to spend so much time, money and effort trying to solve something that was not really a problem, at the expense of real human needs and dilemmas.
The status quoists remind me so much of right-wing opposition to sensible gun-safety measures. The nitpicking is the same rhetorical move--this one measure won’t solve everything, so let’s forget the whole thing. I wish I could convince my friends on the left who are opposed to nuclear power and carbon capture of this.
Incidentally, I have heard some climate alarmists begin to dial it back just a bit. Ezra Klein and even David Wallace Wells are noting that the worst predictions from ten years ago are already not coming true.
I dunno man. Wind will never replace jet fuel so we might as well give up.
I vote you keep writing!