Global Warming is a Scam

[Justatruthseeker]

.

In "modern climate science" they have names for those who want to prove predictions and hypothesis by observations =

"Deniers", "Doubters", "Against Science", "The Minority", "Uninformed", and the list goes on.

What observations? That "Global Warming" paused and became "Climate Change"?

That arctic ice has begun to grow and is no longer shrinking?

That every planet in the solar system went through a heating period, not just earth?

That heat sources they applied to CO2 in the upper atmosphere were actually caused by flux ropes between the sun and earth?

That temperatures are cooling now - after the "pause"?

I agree, those that try to prove predictions and hypothesis by using science and observations are usually called =

"Deniers", "Doubters", "Against Science", "The Minority", "Uninformed", and the list goes on.

Whether it's global warming or cosmology.

 

[Loudmouth]

Nothing else really needs to be said about mythical man-made "global Warming"

Can you tell us why scientists suspect that increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide can increase global temps?

And now it's global COOLING! Return of Arctic ice cap as it grows by 29% in a year | Daily Mail Online

I noticed that you ignored all of the losses before that. This is the type of cherry picking that science deniers are famous for. One year does not a trend make.

 

[Heissonear]

Some Alarmists projections are sincere - but they may need to be more thought through! !


Countries Most Likely To Survive Climate Change

Author: Jonathan Whiting
Published: Tuesday, 06 January 2015

The map below shows the countries most at risk from climate change as well as the countries least at risk and therefore most likely to survive climate change.

The data, published by ND-Gain Index, measures and ranks a country’s vulnerability and readiness to adapt to climate change. It shows many countries in Africa and Asia exhibit a dangerous combination of high vulnerability and low readiness. The map also shows that countries in the West, who are arguably most responsible for causing climate change, are less vulnerable and better prepared, making them most likely to survive the severe impacts of climate change.

With climate change described as one of the greatest challenges of our time, the impacts of destructive changes in temperature, rainfall and agriculture will affect every country. These findings highlight the need for richer, more technologically advanced nations to help less developed countries.

Countries Most Likely To Survive Climate Change | The Eco Experts


However, the map has another "interpretation" to many.
.


Climate Risk Map – Mainly Countries Hostile to the USA | Watts Up With That?

UK Climate experts have prepared a map of countries they think are most at risk of climate change. However their map could easily be mistaken for a geopolitical risk map – the most “endangered” countries are, with few exceptions, countries which are neutral to or even hostile to the USA and Western interests.

High on their risk are countries such as Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Afghanistan, countries whose populations regularly express hostility towards the USA and Western values.

US allies such as Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, and most of Europe score well on the risk map – they are listed as countries least likely to be severely impacted by climate change.

All of this poses an obvious question – if we accept the map at face value, why should we care about climate change?

But propaganda is propaganda. The following is stated in the Alarmist news above:

"The map also shows that countries in the West, who are arguably most responsible for causing climate change"
.


What CO2 induced climate change, the Pause?

Alarmists push statements as if facts.

The Alarmism Bandwagon is their way of life on earth. And with their Bandwagon they run people over every day.

.

 

[Heissonear]

Countries Most Likely To Survive Climate Change | The Eco Experts


"Interesting, no country with a healthy economy is at risk from climate change. "

 

[hurste1951]

What CO2 induced climate change, the Pause?

Can you highlight the "Pause"?

Thanks!

 

[Loudmouth]

Countries Most Likely To Survive Climate Change | The Eco Experts


"Interesting, no country with a healthy economy is at risk from climate change. "

Where does it say that?

"Ultimately there will be no winners from the effects of climate change, every country will be impacted in some way. Just how much depends on the decisions made now by world leaders."

 

[Justatruthseeker]

It would just be nice to see actual truth being told.

While in reality we find:

1) April - not the 2nd warmest on record, but the 3rd.
2) May - not the warmest on record, but 3rd.
3) June - not the warmest on record, but 3rd, again.
4) July - hey got 3rd correct this time.
5) August - oops, again the 3rd, not the 1st.
6) September - too close to call, a three-way tie.

And as for October, November and December, well, we all know how that went. About the same as their claims for the other warmest months on record.

1998 and 2010 both give proof to that lie of warmest anything on record. Let alone the average....

 

[Greatcloud]

It would just be nice to see actual truth being told.

While in reality we find:

1) April - not the 2nd warmest on record, but the 3rd.
2) May - not the warmest on record, but 3rd.
3) June - not the warmest on record, but 3rd, again.
4) July - hey got 3rd correct this time.
5) August - oops, again the 3rd, not the 1st.
6) September - too close to call, a three-way tie.

And as for October, November and December, well, we all know how that went. About the same as their claims for the other warmest months on record.

So you can just revise your graphs every year ?

NO IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY BUDDY; GOD BLESS YOU , EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE SO VERY WRONG !

The common man still doesn't care anyway.......... CO2

 

[Loudmouth]

It would just be nice to see actual truth being told.

Then tell the truth, for once in your life.

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. Increasing the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere traps more heat in the atmosphere. Trapping more heat causes temperatures to rise.

Why must you always run away from these truths?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Then tell the truth, for once in your life.

Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. Increasing the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere traps more heat in the atmosphere. Trapping more heat causes temperatures to rise.

Why must you always run away from these truths?

You got one thing correct, CO2 is a greenhouse gas - an insulator. Being such it also blocks a lot of the direct radiation. Which is why you will notice this period is not as hot as in any past period. We simply treat CO2 as the insulator it is.

But being that is not the main source of energy supply, this period has stayed warmer longer than the others, as that insulator does not let out what heat makes it through that insulator as quickly. We simply treat CO2 as the insulator it is. We have already discussed it is an insulator - not a magic one-way mirror.

You must account for all observed effects - not just the ones you want to pick and choose. You can't ignore that the entire solar system underwent heating during this same time frame - just because the data does not meet your pre-conceived ideas. Even if that is precisely what you do.

You can't claim that this is the hottest year in recorded history, then ignore the arctic ice growing 59% this year alone. Especially when your own published temperatures globally do not match your claims. Even if that is precisely what you do.

You can't even look at the data and begin to claim 2014 was the hottest in recorded history. Even if that is precisely what you do.

 

[Loudmouth]

You got one thing correct, CO2 is a greenhouse gas - an insulator. Being such it also blocks a lot of the direct radiation.

No, it doesn't. CO2 blocks none of the light in the visible range which is the majority of the light.

Once again, you show that you don't understand even the basics of the greenhouse effect.

 

[hurste1951]

You got one thing correct, CO2 is a greenhouse gas - an insulator. Being such it also blocks a lot of the direct radiation.

You have got to be kidding, right? The sun emits in the high energy (short wavelength) end of the spectrum (this may surprise you, but the sun is HOTTER) and so the CO2 in the earth's atmosphere does little to stop that radiation. Meanwhile the earth, after it absorbs that short wavelength radiation downconverts it to emit at long wavelengths (lower energy) radiation which is very much where CO2 absorbs.

It sounds like you don't understand much about this topic. I suspect you've been shown this graph but I'll show it to you as well:

Do you see the difference?

If you would like to learn MORE about how this science works you can read about it HERE

Which is why you will notice this period is not as hot as in any past period. We simply treat CO2 as the insulator it is.

Wow. How does that line up with what REAL scientists tell us about the sun's output of wavelengths? Can you understand your own point in light of the Columbia University citation I just posted?

We have already discussed it is an insulator - not a magic one-way mirror.

Apparently you are treating the Sun as "magic" since in your version of the universe the sun emits a lot more long wavelength radiation and hence stopped by CO2. I'd ask you to show us the emission curve of the Sun in your world.

You must account for all observed effects - not just the ones you want to pick and choose.

Probably best to start by accounting for the ACTUAL RADIATION EMITTED BY THE SUN, not just your imaginary emissions.

The sun is very hot. You should learn more about how Planck's law works.

You can't claim that this is the hottest year in recorded history, then ignore the arctic ice growing 59% this year alone.

It is abundantly clear you don't even understand the concept of noise in a signal. The entire year is not hotter every single day in every single point. The global average is hotter.

I understand statistics isn't for everyone and certainly not for non-scientists. But if I said the average height of kids in North Korea is less than in South Korea do you think that means there are no kids in North Korea who are taller than a South Korean kid????

I'm sorry but it's so hard to have to teach basic science and statistics to people who are so proud of your lack of that knowledge.

 

[Heissonear]

Climate is not math.

Maybe to hyper-climate science addicts.

There is no normal weather in Nevada, nor averages. There is a spectrum of weather, and swings in climate over time. It's not math that happens.


Same with Tulsa Oklahoma. There is no average temperature, but a constant swing in humidity daily, temperature swings from sunrise to sunset, variation in wind, even from the prevailing south, and on it goes.

Weather nor climate is math or statistics, Chap!

Unless you want to promote something, like an agenda against CO2 in the earth's atmosphere - such as CO2 is a pollutant and a "major problem" in "Global Warming". Then math and CALCULATIONS RULE!!! Right?

That is called conjecture with sparse, incomplete data, Chap.

 

[hurste1951]

Climate is not math.

Science is. Sorry this is a revelation to you, Mr. "Geochemist".

Maybe to hyper-climate science addicts.

OR PEOPLE WHO BOTHER TO LEARN THE SCIENCE.

There is no normal weather in Nevada, nor averages.

Thankfully when I did my GEOCHEMISTRY-based PhD I had to take statistics. Wish you did.

There is a spectrum of weather, and swings in climate over time. It's not math that happens.

Oh my! PEOPLE THIS GUY DOESN'T EVEN KNOW THE BASICS OF SCIENCE, let alone climate!

Weather nor climate is math or statistics, Chap!

LOL! This is the most uninformed statement made on this forum about climate science!!

TRANSLATION FOR NON-SCIENTISTS: Heissonear doesn't understand statistics or its central role in observational science.

People who don't understand statistics ALWAYS claim that statistics isn't important in a particular area.

 

[Heissonear]

Amazingly Bandwagon climate change scientists have recently discovered "Atmospheric Rivers" and their effects.

This type of trash science should never exist. What a disgrace to the science community.

The role of atmospheric rivers in anomalous snow accumulation in East Antarctica - Gorodetskaya - 2014 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

Irina V. Gorodetskaya1,*, Maria Tsukernik2, Kim Claes1, Martin F. Ralph3, William D. Neff4,5, and Nicole P. M. Van Lipzig1

 

[hurste1951]

Amazingly Bandwagon climate change scientists have recently discovered "Atmospheric Rivers" and their effects.

This type of trash science should never exist. What a disgrace to the science community.

The role of atmospheric rivers in anomalous snow accumulation in East Antarctica - Gorodetskaya - 2014 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

Irina V. Gorodetskaya1,*, Maria Tsukernik2, Kim Claes1, Martin F. Ralph3, William D. Neff4,5, and Nicole P. M. Van Lipzig1

Interesting: YET ANOTHER thing in climate and atmospheric science Heissonear doesn't know about! If you would like to learn about the SCIENCE you can read about these "atmospheric rivers" HERE

Heissonear would probably also be interested to know that "rivers" (or discrete currents) actually exist in the OCEANS as well!

About 20 years ago I was working as an oceanographic lab technician on a research cruise characterizing sea water in the North Atlantic. At that time I learned about these "currents" which move water in packets kind of like "rivers" do...but these "rivers" were inside the mass of the ocean water.

Now, I understand that Heissonear has trouble with science in general (he seems to show an alamring lack of knowledge of most things in the earth sciences, which is a msytery considering he calls himself a "geochemist". I'm a geochemist as well and I can safely say that Heissonear seems to be woefully unprepared for that field.)

I would HOPE that no one would read Heissonear's posts without actually CONSULTING REAL SCIENCE first!

 

[Loudmouth]

Amazingly Bandwagon climate change scientists have recently discovered "Atmospheric Rivers" and their effects.

This type of trash science should never exist. What a disgrace to the science community.

The role of atmospheric rivers in anomalous snow accumulation in East Antarctica - Gorodetskaya - 2014 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

Irina V. Gorodetskaya1,*, Maria Tsukernik2, Kim Claes1, Martin F. Ralph3, William D. Neff4,5, and Nicole P. M. Van Lipzig1

Nothing more than personal attacks to try and cover up your inability to deal with the science.

 

[Heissonear]

Nothing more than personal attacks to try and cover up your inability to deal with the science.

Are you sure? You project such is real but it is not.

A MIT Professor of Meteorology was interviewed, as presented below:


RICHARD LINDZEN: CLIMATE ALARMISM IS A DOOMSDAY CULT

Date: 22/01/15 Howie Carr, Breitbart News

An MIT professor of meteorology is dismissing global-warming alarmists as a discredited “cult” whose members are becoming more hysterical as emerging evidence continues to contradict their beliefs.

“As with any cult, once the mythology of the cult begins falling apart, instead of saying, oh, we were wrong, they get more and more fanatical. I think that’s what’s happening here. Think about it,” he said. “You’ve led an unpleasant life, you haven’t led a very virtuous life, but now you’re told, you get absolution if you watch your carbon footprint. It’s salvation!”

Lindzen, 74, has issued calm dismissals of warmist apocalypse, reducing his critics to sputtering rage.

Last week, government agencies including NASA announced that 2014 was the “hottest year” in “recorded history,” as The New York Times put it in an early edition. Last year has since been demoted by the Times to the hottest “since record-keeping began in 1880.”

But that may not be true. Now the same agencies have acknowledged that there’s only a 38 percent chance that 2014 was the hottest year on record. And even if it was, it was only by two-100ths of a degree.

Lindzen scoffs at the public-sector-generated hysteria, which included one warmist blogger breathlessly writing that the heat record had been “shattered.”

“Seventy percent of the earth is oceans, we can’t measure those temperatures very well. They can be off a half a degree, a quarter of a degree. Even two-10ths of a degree of change would be tiny but two-100ths is ludicrous. Anyone who starts crowing about those numbers shows that they’re putting spin on nothing.”


Source:
Richard Lindzen: Climate Alarmism Is A Doomsday Cult | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

The Doomsday Cult utilizes Bandwagon science: however, in reality there is no evidence of CO2 induced Global Warming. It is a spin.

Is there science for CAGW or pseudo-science for it? Is observed evidence confirming your belief or exposing it as incorrect, natural factors still contols earth's temperature?



.

 

[Heissonear]

.

The Scam has it's religious following.


Greenpeace Names Activists Behind Its Epic Fail - Businessweek

Greenpeace has provided Peruvian authorities with the identities of the four foreign activists principally responsible for vandalizing the Nazca Lines heritage site during last month’s international climate negotiations in Lima, Bloomberg Businessweekhas learned. The stunt, in which activists placed yellow letters urging climate action near a hummingbird carved in soil 1,500 years ago that is a national symbol of Peru, bombed. It distracted attention from the climate talks and outraged Peru’s people and government, which has called for the activists’ extradition to face legal charges. The action also gave Greenpeace, one of the world’s most recognized nongovernmental organizations and social brands, the worst public relations black eye in its 40-plus years of attention-grabbing protest.

Source: mobile.businessweek.com/articles/2015-01-20/greenpeace-names-activists-behind-its-epic-fail-in-peru
.

 

[Heissonear]

What a Scam we face today.



JUDITH CURRY: RAW POLITICS OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE U.S.

Date: 22/01/15 Judith Curry, Climate Etc.

President Obama’s State of the Union address, and the reactions from opposing politicians and the media, illustrate the raw politics of climate change in the U.S.
Last night, President Obama’s State of the Union address included some fairly substantial words on climate change. The Carbon Brief provides a good summary, including a video link. Here are the relevant text excerpts:

2014 was the planet’s warmest year on record. Now, one year doesn’t make a trend, but this does — 14 of the 15 warmest years on record have all fallen in the first 15 years of this century.

I’ve heard some folks try to dodge the evidence by saying they’re not scientists; that we don’t have enough information to act. Well, I’m not a scientist, either. But you know what — I know a lot of really good scientists at NASA, and NOAA, and at our major universities. The best scientists in the world are all telling us that our activities are changing the climate, and if we do not act forcefully, we’ll continue to see rising oceans, longer, hotter heat waves, dangerous droughts and floods, and massive disruptions that can trigger greater migration, conflict, and hunger around the globe.

Politics of ‘warmest year’
Naive scientist that I am, it didn’t occur to me until last night that a narrative the NASA/NOAA press releaseof ‘warmest year’ was needed to provide the President with a sound bite to motivate his climate agenda. A scientifically sound press release like that issued by Berkeley Earth just wouldn’t fit the bill. (JC note: I am deleting the following text ‘the timing of the NASA/NOAA press release on warmest year was motivated by the timing of the President’s SOTU address&#8217


Source: Judith Curry: Raw Politics Of Climate Change In The U.S. | The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

Judith Curry is a professor of climatology at Georgia Tech, and currently revising her second edition text on the thermodynamics of earth's atmosphere.