Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8143
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: "I hope all the global-warming diniers are living really close to the sea."

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:02 am

henry quirk wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:49 am
I live in south Louisiana, within drivin' distance of the gulf.

:D

seeds
Posts: 790
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: There are plenty of examples to choose from...you don't need mine

Post by seeds » Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:07 am

Lacewing wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:29 pm
seeds wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 8:48 pm
To be honest, we are all basically unconscious and sleepwalking through life.
Yes, we are! :D
seeds wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 8:48 pm
It’s just that some of us are more deeply asleep than others.
Sweet dreams to all!
That’s a beautiful sentiment, Lace, but unfortunately, it seems as though the deeper the level of sleep,...

(in other words, the lower in consciousness by which a human sleepwalks through life)

...then the more likely the dream will tend toward the dark and nightmarish realms, as represented by the aforementioned KKK member, or the serial killer, or the blindly obedient soldier who slaughters men, women, and children because some idiot in a uniform (or business suit) told him to do it.
_______

seeds
Posts: 790
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

Post by seeds » Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:09 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 10:13 pm
I hope all the global-warming diniers are living really close to the sea.

Image
Yes, and if it weren’t for the fact that so many innocent Floridians would be hurt, one could get a kick out of seeing the highest rooftop of Mar-a-Lago, just barely appearing above the ocean waves, while you know who sits in a rowboat and exclaims:

“...nobody knew that global warming could be so complicated...”
_______

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 4798
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

“...nobody knew that global warming could be so complicated...”

Post by henry quirk » Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:43 am

Indeed.
henry quirk wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 2:39 pm
henry quirk wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:21 pm
henry quirk wrote:
Fri Aug 09, 2019 3:32 pm
https://www.forbes.com/sites/doronlevin ... 92de686945
   
Global warming and post apocalyptic future. Climate change and melting of glaciers. Statue of Liberty collapses under water and new New York city skyline on an artificial island. Perhaps the catastrophic predictions are overblown.

The U.S. auto industry and regulators in California and Washington appear deadlocked over stiff Obama-era fuel-efficiency standards that automakers oppose and the Trump administration have vowed to roll back – an initiative that has environmental activists up in arms.

California and four automakers favor compromise, while the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) supports the president’s position that the federal standards are too strict. The EPA argues that forcing automakers to build more fuel efficient cars will make them less affordable, causing consumers to delay trading older, less efficient vehicles. Complicating matters is California’s authority to create its own air quality standards, which the White House vows to end.

However the impasse is resolved, the moment looks ripe to revisit the root of this multifactorial dustup: namely, the scientific “consensus” that CO2 emissions from vehicles and other sources are pushing the earth to the brink of climate catastrophe.

In a modest office on the campus of Jerusalem’s Hebrew University, an Israeli astrophysicist patiently explains why he is convinced that the near-unanimous judgments of climatologists are misguided.  Nir Shaviv, chairman of the university’s physics department, says that his research and that of colleagues, suggests that rising CO2 levels, while hardly insignificant, play only a minor role compared to the influence of the sun and cosmic radiation on the earth’s climate.

“Global warming clearly is a problem, though not in the catastrophic terms of Al Gore’s movies or environmental alarmists,” said Shaviv. “Climate change has existed forever and is unlikely to go away. But CO2 emissions don’t play the major role. Periodic solar activity does.”

Shaviv, 47, fully comprehends that his scientific conclusions constitute a glaring rebuttal to the widely-quoted surveys showing that 97% of climate scientists agree that human activity – the combustion of fossil fuels – constitutes the principle reason for climate change.

“Only people who don’t understand science take the 97% statistic seriously,” he said. “Survey results depend on who you ask, who answers and how the questions are worded.  In any case, science is not a democracy. Even if 100% of scientists believe something, one person with good evidence can still be right.”

History is replete with lone voices toppling scientific orthodoxies. Astronomers deemed Pluto the ninth planet – until they changed their minds. Geologists once regarded tectonic plate theory, the movement of continents, as nonsense. Medicine were 100% certain that stomach (ulcers) resulted from stress and spicy food, until an Australian researcher proved bacteria the culprit and won a Nobel Prize for his efforts.

Lest anyone dismiss Shaviv on the basis of his scientific credentials or supposed political agenda, consider the following: He enrolled at Israel’s Technion University – the country’s equivalent of MIT – at the age of 13 and earned an MA while serving in the Israel Defense Force’s celebrated 8200 Intelligence unit. He returned to Technion, where he earned his doctorate, afterward completing post-doctoral work at California Institute of Technology and the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics. He also has been an Einstein Fellow at The Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton.

In other words, he knows tons more about science than Donald Trump or Al Gore.

As for politics “in American terms, I would describe myself as liberal on most domestic issues, somewhat hawkish on security,” he said. Nonetheless, the Trump administration’s position on global climate change, he said, is correct insofar as it rejects the orthodoxy of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC’s findings and conclusions are updated every six years; the latest report, released this week, noted that deforestation and agribusiness are contributing to CO2 emissions and aggravating climate change.

In 2003, Shaviv and research partner Prof. Jan Veizer published a paper on the subject of climate sensitivity, namely how much the earth’s average temperature would be expected to change if the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is doubled.  Comparing geological records and temperature, the team came up with a projected change of 1.0 to 1.5 degrees Celsius – much less than the 1.5 to 4.5 degree change the IPCC has used since it began issuing its reports. The reason for the much wider variation used by the IPCC, he said, was that they relied almost entirely on simulations and no one knew how to quantify the effect of clouds – which affects how much radiant energy reaches the earth – and other factors.

“Since then, literally billions have been spent on climate research,” he said. Yet “the conventional wisdom hasn’t changed. The proponents of man-made climate change still ignore the effect of the sun on the earth’s climate, which overturns our understanding of twentieth-century climate change.”

He explained: “Solar activity varies over time. A major variation is roughly eleven years or more, which clearly affects climate. This principle has been generally known – but in 2008 I was able to quantify it by using sea level data.  When the sun is more active, there is a rise in sea level here on earth. Higher temperature makes water expand.  When the sun is less active, temperature goes down and the sea level falls – the correlation is as clear as day.

“Based on the increase of solar activity during the twentieth century, it should account for between half to two-thirds of all climate change,” he said. “That, in turn, implies that climate sensitivity to CO2 should be about 1.0 degree when the amount of CO2 doubles.”

The link between solar activity and the heating and cooling of the earth is indirect, he explained. Cosmic rays entering the earth’s atmosphere from the explosive death of massive stars across the universe play a significant role in the formation of so-called cloud condensation nuclei needed for the formation of clouds.  When the sun is more active, solar wind reduces the rate of cosmic rays entering the atmosphere. A more active solar wind leads to fewer cloud formation nuclei, producing clouds that are less white and less reflective, thus warming the earth.

“Today we can demonstrate and prove the sun’s effect on climate based on a wide range of evidence, from fossils that are hundreds of millions of years old to buoy readings to satellite altimetry data from the past few decades,” he said. “We also can reproduce and mimic atmospheric conditions in the laboratory to confirm the evidence.

"All of it shows the same thing, the bulk of climate change is caused by the sun via its impact on atmospheric charge,” he said. “Which means that most of the warming comes from nature, whereas a doubling of the amount of CO2 raises temperature by only 1.0 to 1.5 degrees.  A freshman physics student can see this.”

Nevertheless, the world of climate science has “mostly ignored” his research findings. “Of course, I’m frustrated,” he said. “Our findings are very inconvenient for conventional wisdom” as summarized by the IPCC.  “We know that there have been very large variations of climate in the past that have little to do with the burning of fossil fuels.  A thousand years ago the earth was as warm as it is today. During the Little Ice Age three hundred years ago the River Thames froze more often.  In the first and second IPCC reports these events were mentioned.  In 2001 they disappeared. Suddenly no mention of natural warming, no Little Ice Age. The climate of the last millennium was presented as basically fixed until the twentieth century.  This is a kind of Orwellian cherry-picking to fit a pre-determined narrative.”

Shaviv says that he has accepted no financial support for his research by the fossil fuel industry. Experiments in Denmark with Prof. Henrik Svensmark and others to demonstrate the effect of cosmic rays on cloud formation were supported by the Carlsberg Foundation. In the U.S. the conservative Heartland Institute and the European Institute for Climate and Energy have invited him to speak, covering travel expenses.

“The real problem is funding from funding agencies like the National Science Foundation because these proposals have to undergo review by people in a community that ostracizes us,” he said, because of his non-conventional viewpoint.

“Global warming is not a purely scientific issue any more,” he said.  “It has repercussions for society.  It has also taken on a moralistic, almost religious quality. If you believe what everyone believes, you are a good person. If you don’t, you are a bad person.  Who wants to be a sinner?”

Any scientist who rejects the UN’s IPCC report, as he does, will have trouble finding work, receiving research grants or publishing, he said.

In Shaviv’s view, the worldwide crusade to limit and eventually ban the use of fossil fuels isn’t just misguided “it comes with real world social and economic consequences.” Switching to more costly energy sources, for example, will drive industry from more industrialized countries to poorer countries that can less afford wind turbines and solar panels.

“It may be a financial sacrifice the rich are willing to make, he said. “Even in developed countries the pressure to forego fossil fuel puts poor people in danger of freezing during the winter for lack of affordable home heating.  The economic growth of third world countries will be inhibited if they cannot borrow from the World Bank to develop cheap fossil-based power plants. These are serious human problems in the here and now, not in a theoretical future.”

For Shaviv, the rejection and closed-mindedness his minority view provoke may contain a silver lining.  Just think of the acclaim that awaits if his research -- and scientific reconsideration of the current orthodoxy -- one day proves persuasive.
Should I post other pieces, by other folks, disputin' the conventional wisdom (folly) that people are wreckin' the climate?

I could...but you alarmists won't read them.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 3268
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Henry...I read it and responded

Post by Lacewing » Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:51 am

henry quirk wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:43 am
Should I post other pieces, by other folks, disputin' the conventional wisdom (folly) that people are wreckin' the climate?

I could...but you alarmists won't read them.
You can't see what you ignore. :)

Walker
Posts: 6714
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

Post by Walker » Fri Aug 16, 2019 10:29 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 10:13 pm
I hope all the global-warming diniers are living really close to the sea.
Mans’ effect on climate change is insignificant.
This is the thread topic.

However,

Climate change’s effect on man is significant.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.

The effect of weather events, such as hurricanes, is also significant to man.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.

Walker
Posts: 6714
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

Post by Walker » Fri Aug 16, 2019 10:38 am

Walker wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 5:23 pm
Skepdick wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:35 pm
Walker wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:34 pm
Judging by your comments, you only see words.
That's rather ironic, since you are the one rejecting all the evidence for measured moral progress as "just language".

You've built a Strawman to your own image. Now - ATTACK! ATTACK! ATTACK!
Check out the plight of cities caused by immoral Progressive governance, e.g., Chicago, Baltimore, San Francisco, etc.
Philadelphia, Detroit, Seattle, etc.

Attacking the thread topic by noting the effects of climate change and weather events upon humankind, is inappropriate within the context of this situation.

One would think this is rather obvious, but apparently it's not, so it must be mentioned, although that's no guarantee that the mentioning will affect any carapaces made too thick by propaganda conditioning, the thickness indicated by the empirical evidence of the recent postings by those who whine about the weather, and the climate.

:D

Walker
Posts: 6714
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

Post by Walker » Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:02 pm

seeds wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:09 am
“...nobody knew that global warming could be so complicated...”
_______
That's precisely why so-called climate science is nothing more than an imprecise game of what-if, based on selective data (which is often corrupted) and played with other people's money, rather than based on the totality of variables.

Does the fact that you can't see this make you a racist bigot, or is that indicated by your wishing of harm, via a weather event, upon a human being?

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8143
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:15 pm

Walker wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 10:29 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 10:13 pm
I hope all the global-warming diniers are living really close to the sea.
Mans’ effect on climate change is insignificant.
This is the thread topic.

However,

Climate change’s effect on man is significant.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.

The effect of weather events, such as hurricanes, is also significant to man.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.
What happened to 'global warming is a hoax'? 'Global warming isn't happening'? You ratbags have changed your story to suit yourselves. Why would that be?
What is your motive? Do you have shares in coal mines and oil or something? It's always about money, so what's your stake in making the planet uninhabitable for yourself? How much is a planet worth to you?

Walker
Posts: 6714
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: “...nobody knew that global warming could be so complicated...”

Post by Walker » Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:17 pm

henry quirk wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:43 am
Should I post other pieces, by other folks, disputin' the conventional wisdom (folly) that people are wreckin' the climate?

I could...but you alarmists won't read them.
The ignoring of facts is likely caused by jackassedness.

Walker
Posts: 6714
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

Post by Walker » Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:19 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:15 pm
Walker wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 10:29 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 10:13 pm
I hope all the global-warming diniers are living really close to the sea.
Mans’ effect on climate change is insignificant.
This is the thread topic.

However,

Climate change’s effect on man is significant.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.

The effect of weather events, such as hurricanes, is also significant to man.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.
What happened to 'global warming is a hoax'? 'Global warming isn't happening'? You ratbags have changed your story to suit yourselves. Why would that be?
What is your motive? Do you have shares in coal mines and oil or something? It's always about money, so what's your stake in making the planet uninhabitable for yourself? How much is a planet worth to you?
You obviously don't understand what I wrote.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8143
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:38 pm

Walker wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:19 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:15 pm
Walker wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 10:29 am

Mans’ effect on climate change is insignificant.
This is the thread topic.

However,

Climate change’s effect on man is significant.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.

The effect of weather events, such as hurricanes, is also significant to man.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.
What happened to 'global warming is a hoax'? 'Global warming isn't happening'? You ratbags have changed your story to suit yourselves. Why would that be?
What is your motive? Do you have shares in coal mines and oil or something? It's always about money, so what's your stake in making the planet uninhabitable for yourself? How much is a planet worth to you?
You obviously don't understand what I wrote.
I understand perfectly.

Walker
Posts: 6714
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

Post by Walker » Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:16 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:38 pm
Walker wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:19 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:15 pm


What happened to 'global warming is a hoax'? 'Global warming isn't happening'? You ratbags have changed your story to suit yourselves. Why would that be?
What is your motive? Do you have shares in coal mines and oil or something? It's always about money, so what's your stake in making the planet uninhabitable for yourself? How much is a planet worth to you?
You obviously don't understand what I wrote.
I understand perfectly.
That would make you the Mary Poppins of understanding ... practically perfect in every way.

Your comments don’t reflect that.

Just because deluded folks use the term Climate Change Denier to attack those who question the propaganda, does not mean that anyone denies that the climate changes. Thinking that is does mean that is like the folks who think that calling themselves Progressive, makes them progressive.

Those who have a financial interest in the Climate Change Scam (CCS) are those who invest in windmills and solar power, and then artificially depress the reliable, practical sources of energy via crony capitalism, which relies on influence with government officials who regulate the practical sources of energy out of existence, as Obama promised to do as a candidate, with coal. As it turned out, technology and the wealth of natural resource ended up making fracking more cost efficient than coal, thus market forces made his vicious ideological promise, moot.

Windmills are like alchemy. Turning base metals into precious metals is far more expensive than the worth of the precious metal. Manufacturing and maintaining wind turbines requires more energy than the energy return, an energy return which is also insufficient for modern requirements, btw.

Do you perfectly understand that, MP? :wink:

Walker
Posts: 6714
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

Post by Walker » Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:42 pm

Mans’ effect on climate change is insignificant.
This is the thread topic.

However,

Climate change’s effect on man is significant.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.

The effect of weather events, such as hurricanes, is also significant to man.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.

Belinda
Posts: 2869
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Effect of human activity on climate change is insignificant

Post by Belinda » Fri Aug 16, 2019 5:23 pm

Walker wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:42 pm
Mans’ effect on climate change is insignificant.
This is the thread topic.

However,

Climate change’s effect on man is significant.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.

The effect of weather events, such as hurricanes, is also significant to man.
This is undisputed, but this is not the thread topic.


Please stop saying Lalalalala and eat less meat and dairy, and don't fly.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests