21st century kids

MichaelS said:
You should know that it is next to impossible to prove or disprove anything in science. If we base our views on observation, there is much evidence that co2 has nothing to do with affecting temperature. In fact the reverse is true. Co2 rises due to temperature increase from ocean out-gassing. The fact that currently, co2 and temperature are rising is meaningless (correlation does not mean causation) as will be noted when temperatures begin to fall within the next couple of decades or so.
Surely you have seen this graph..
View attachment 269670

Here is a reconstruction of the eocine (55 million years ago.) As you can clearly see, co2 (green diamonds, from proxy stomatal data [more stomata = lower co2] and pink circles - average from various proxies) actually increase from the warm early to the cooler late.
co2 has nothing to do with temperature. The notion that carbon dioxide is the control knob of global temperature is hypothetical garbage and this can be seen in representations of modal temperature predictions compared to observation.

View attachment 269676

Add to this the fact that temperatures fell for 30 years and more starting in the late 40's (during which there was the ''ice age scare) while co2 concentration went up.
co2 induced climate change is an absolute nonsense of a proposal and the fact that it has led to hysterical claims of doom from the likes of AlainK and XR and Greta and many so-called scientists, along with trillions of dollars spent on something we have no control over, is beyond laughable.
Click to expand...
Neither of those charts matter. The first reason is the resolution on the X-Axis is on the order of 20+ million years. Do you really think that you would see anything over the past 100 years at that resolution? Nah bro. let's assume that each x-axis is 100cm long. It's not, it just makes the math easier. Now, for the first chart you have 6 million years per cm. a span of 100 years would equate to a length of 0.001667 of a mm. Similarly for the second graph a period of 100 years would look like 0.0417mm. This is ASSUMING each chart is a meter wide. This math was done on a napkin essentially, if I missed a decimal place or something my conclusions still hold.

Second, to assume that life currently evolved to deal with the climate during the Eocene is a non-sequitur. Life evolves over time to suit the environmental conditions it finds itself in. Sure, E. Coli can evolve to its surroundings within days to weeks, but larger animals with slower rates of reproduction, animals such as ourselves and all our pets, evolve at only a fraction of the pace.

We have known since the days of Eunice Foote, the 1850s, that CO2 and other atmospheric gasses absorb can and do heat from visible light.

Let me ask this, what do YOU have to lose by switching to a low carbon future? Money in the here and now? I'd like to see the rainforests before I die, too bad about the Great Barrier Reef tho..... Considering that my generation will have to pick up the tab that climate change will bring, I don't think that anyone should bitch about the money other than the people who are going to have to spend it to right the climate ship. Seriously, why is it that the current politicos can ALWAYS find money for tax breaks for rich people and money for wars, but never for things that have the potential to actually make the world a better place? If we didn't need the energy in oil, could the war torn oil nations find peace?
 
"PaleFire, post: 691631, member: 27388"]
Neither of those charts matter. The first reason is the resolution on the X-Axis is on the order of 20+ million years. Do you really think that you would see anything over the past 100 years at that resolution? Nah bro. let's assume that each x-axis is 100cm long. It's not, it just makes the math easier. Now, for the first chart you have 6 million years per cm. a span of 100 years would equate to a length of 0.001667 of a mm. Similarly for the second graph a period of 100 years would look like 0.0417mm. This is ASSUMING each chart is a meter wide. This math was done on a napkin essentially, if I missed a decimal place or something my conclusions still hold.
Click to expand...


Oh please! Resolution? I have given you evidence that global temps and co2 do dot correlate. I also added that temps fell for 30 years to the late 70's while co2 rose. Is that enough resolution for you?
We have known since the days of Eunice Foote, the 1850s, that CO2 and other atmospheric gasses absorb can and do heat from visible light.
Click to expand...
No. Those so called greenhouse gases (of which water makes up 95%) absorb IR radiation which is not visible. Visible light passes right through. But regardless of that it is pretty evident - as I have shown you - that co2 makes next to no difference if that.

Let me ask this, what do YOU have to lose by switching to a low carbon future? Money in the here and now? I'd like to see the rainforests before I die, too bad about the Great Barrier Reef tho..... Considering that my generation will have to pick up the tab that climate change will bring, I don't think that anyone should bitch about the money other than the people who are going to have to spend it to right the climate ship. Seriously, why is it that the current politicos can ALWAYS find money for tax breaks for rich people and money for wars, but never for things that have the potential to actually make the world a better place? If we didn't need the energy in oil, could the war torn oil nations find peace?
Click to expand...

.I have nothing personally against no-carbon energy. Unfortunately it doesn't work efficiently enough to power our needs. You should rest peacefully in the knowledge that the rainforests and the Great Barrier reef are not affected by a bit of extra heat and they are certainly not affected by co2 If you think that we are actually capable of altering the climate by cutting co2 emmissions you are in for a serious dissapointment.
 
..." If we didn't need the energy in oil, could the war torn oil nations find peace?"...

The wars of today are primarily religious wars. Name a current war that doesn't have Islamic contestants? They need the oil revenue; the oil will get out to the rest of the world regardless of who is paying who for it.

It's interesting that you regard tax breaks for people who pay taxes lower in value to society than people who receive government payments just for being alive and unable to support themselves or the country. Railing against the people of the USA for being responsible for the destruction of rainforests that belong to and are being managed or mismanaged by other people who are also non-US citizens is not productive, either. It's not our Great Barrier Reef, either.

The garbage being dumped into the oceans are also not coming from the USA or any other country willing to sign enforceable treaties. I think you would find more allies and accumulate fewer opponents if you named the culprits you are accusing rather than using a shotgun approach. If Anthony is screwing his island, say so!
 
MichaelS said:
That's not true coffeegirl. Most people do in fact care a lot about the environment. We have sewage being pumped into the sea, plastic pollution, particulate pollution in the air, deforestation, artificial hormone like substances in the food chain, wholesale erosion, habitat destruction and on and on. All these things are important but instead of attending to those we are spending trillions of dollars studying poor old co2, a natural trace gas which is basically plant food and the basis of all life. on this planet.
Click to expand...

That’s good. That gives me hope.
 
MichaelS said:
Yep already heard one of the organizers talking about this this morning. Just more of the same old tired bullshit. Nothing new. Many of the so-called experts have nothing to do with atmospheric physics. They are bird experts, students, ecologists blah blah blah. Not liars. Just moronic sheep from an eco chamber. I dismiss it out of hand. It's all based on the same notion about a trace gas. Sorry, more verbal vomit to me.
Click to expand...
Is it lonely up there on your pedastool?
 
Cannot carbon be trapped in a solid, and placed deep below
in abandoned mines ?

If it is such a problem.

Or are trees an option.
Bonsai saves the world.
Good Day
Anthony
 
Anthony said:
Cannot carbon be trapped in a solid, and placed deep below
in abandoned mines ?
Click to expand...

{sarcasm on}
Have you not heard what our resident expert on climate chance sais? Carbon is not an issue. So we do not need to do anything. o_O. Of course, that is if you take his opinion over that of the 1000 or so people in the world who have made it their job to understand what is going on. made it their source of income to make the world believe they need more money to study climate.

We need to listen to big oil compagnies because they really know that there is no risk in using fossile fuels. And lets be honest. What do they have to win when we keep using oil and gas.
{sarcasm off}
 
@leatherback ,

sadly Trinidad [ less than 1% oil to join Opec, Venezuela stood for us ]
is one of the worst offenders.
To explain is complicated, but know a very mixed group of folk,
say they are oppressed, but are the ruling party.[ now at 30 % of the
population.]

Would Nuclear Fusion work ?

Seriously, solutions will need to be fully thought out.

Because we are a mild people. Down at the San Fernando
wharf, was found a major sewage leak into the sea.
Because it heavily affected the village of squatters.
The local water authority ignored it.

Squatters down here make lots of children, who are
ofen young criminals and the po;ice shoot to kill.
Problem solved.
Good Day
Anthony

* growing bonsai has been shown to lower blood pressure
and no extra salt. as well slow the use of ganja.

Also helps to remember 1 or 2 for replacement as children
go. Not 15!!!!
 
Fusion works, but it'll be a while before it's commercialized, like 50 or 100 years? Or more? Who knows? Hydrogen cars emit only heat and water. The VW Hindenburg Coupé is being withheld from the market for the present. The steam car was really efficient and the White Steamer utilized the whole body as housing for the steam lines. However, it was hard to sell because when people considered what would happen in an accident when a steam line broke and cooked the passengers... There's a yin for every yang. Hydrogen cars make steamers look like toys.
 
MichaelS said:
Oh please! Resolution? I have given you evidence that global temps and co2 do dot correlate. I also added that temps fell for 30 years to the late 70's while co2 rose. Is that enough resolution for you?

No. Those so called greenhouse gases (of which water makes up 95%) absorb IR radiation which is not visible. Visible light passes right through. But regardless of that it is pretty evident - as I have shown you - that co2 makes next to no difference if that.



.I have nothing personally against no-carbon energy. Unfortunately it doesn't work efficiently enough to power our needs. You should rest peacefully in the knowledge that the rainforests and the Great Barrier reef are not affected by a bit of extra heat and they are certainly not affected by co2 If you think that we are actually capable of altering the climate by cutting co2 emmissions you are in for a serious dissapointment.
Click to expand...
ok boomer
 
coh said:
Yeah, so did we. It helps me be less concerned about these climate issues knowing that I don't have any children or grandchildren who are going to have to deal with the mess we're leaving behind.
Click to expand...
I wish I could convince my other half of the same thing. She’s well aware of potential future struggles, but those damn instincts override the logic.
 
Hey folks,

happy thought for the day.
K challenged me to fix his 1980 washing machine.
3 weeks, finding parts, and Nic epoxy painting.
Works like a charm ------ for 40 more years ?

Problems - no problem - let us fix it.

I admire men like @leatherback , birth control masters.
Me, I get happy, I get lai..............
Many happy days in Trinidad.
3 boys plus 2 cousins - Oxford, Cambridge and an Atelier in
Florence, all in Research.

Made a promise to all, ever get in trouble, door home is
always open.

Warned you guys, cooler weather and I become a happy
pest.
Great Day
Anthony
 
Woocash said:
I wish I could convince my other half of the same thing. She’s well aware of potential future struggles, but those damn instincts override the logic.
Click to expand...
Well, the flip side of our decision is that as we get older, there is no one there to provide a safety net. No kids we can impose on! Obviously you hope it never comes to that but it's probably nice to know someone is there to help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom