Hans Blaster
Rocket surgeon
- Mar 11, 2017
- 14,647
- 11,691
- 54
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
Go spend some time in quaternary geology.
Or better, Climatology, I have.
Upvote
0
Go spend some time in quaternary geology.
Quaternary Geology or Paleogeology will give coverage of the Ice Ages. Climatology may not cover in detail. The subject of paleoclimatology is a much thicker read.Or better, Climatology, I have.
Quaternary Geology or Paleogeology will give coverage of the Ice Ages. Climatology may not cover in detail. The subject of paleoclimatology is a much thicker read.
I take it you people must be globalists, anti-conservative, perhaps pro-communist, lets reduce the economy to zero. Are y'all related to Greta? You simply don't understand the systems as a whole but you must think Al Gore is part of the Holy Trinity. As I said-try reading some of the stuff the above scientists have published. Just to note, I have my own extensive library in my own home on all earth science fields & then some. I seek to educate people. Your lot seems to be to cling to a religion.
"It is false because I don't like it" is not a very good argument.My point is on the media is I don't buy all the garbage the media has put out to advance the cause of global warming. Many people swallow the junk hook line & sinker because they figure oh if it's in the news it must be true. The media does not do journalism. And if one is opposing their theory & researching one sees the media garbage on any climate trend extends far back into the decades so the media can't predict warming. The bottom line is there is no consensus on this issue other than there are many feedback loops that link all the earth sciences & it takes a good education to see what has happened over time. You people live in a rather narrow world. God forbid you think Al Gore was St. Paul. Its bunk. Climate changes because it changes. What college education should do is give one the skills to critically reason. Go spend some time in quaternary geology.
I am no fan of Al Gore either. But that does not mean that there is no global warming. In fact as I have admitted before I used to deny global warming. My main reason was not a very good one. Al Gore.globalist: No frankly, I have no interest in surrendering an atom of my sovereignty to a global government populated by authoritarian governments that don't respect American Enlightenment ideas about freedom and self-determination.
anti-conservative: "conservative" is term so poorly defined (and used modify so many things) that I don't know if I'm anti-whatever it is.
pro-communist: Nope. I don't think the government should own the manufacturers, farms, and shops.
"lets reduce the economy to zero.": No economy means everyone must be engaged in subsistance agriculture and I don't have enough land for that.
"Are y'all related to Greta?" Not that I know of, but I've had this understanding of Climate change longer than she's been alive, so I fail to see the relevance.
"You simply don't understand the systems as a whole but you must think Al Gore is part of the Holy Trinity.": My opinion of Al Gore isn't particularly high, but it is also irrelevant.
"As I said-try reading some of the stuff the above scientists have published." Then tell us who they are, link to their writings, and explain why they matter.
"Your lot seems to be to cling to a religion." I'm not sure what lot you refer to. People who accept global warming science, atheists, christians? Personally, I gave up church for Lent 20 years ago, and I'm fine without religion of any kind.
Apart from avoiding my question your diversion is another example where the entropy change involving the evaporation of sweat which cools the body involves an endothermic process which doesn't involve a change to the mechanical reservoir.What happens to a runner when he goes out for a 7 mile run. All that ATP he makes does not go into work. Lots is simply lost as the form of heat-better known as entropy. What happens when the body warms too much-it sweats. Evaporation of sweat cools the body.
The media are irrelevant to the science of global warming. Your fixation on them suggest you haven't used the critical thinking skills your praise. When you start dissecting specific arguments and data in the IPCC reports then I will take you seriously. Until then you are just contributing to the warming by generating hot air.My point is on the media is I don't buy all the garbage the media has put out to advance the cause of global warming. Many people swallow the junk hook line & sinker because they figure oh if it's in the news it must be true.
I tend to share the view of a hard rock researcher of my acquaintance who viewed the Cambrian and up as superficial drift deposits.Go spend some time in quaternary geology.
I take it you people must be globalists, anti-conservative, perhaps pro-communist, lets reduce the economy to zero. Are y'all related to Greta? You simply don't understand the systems as a whole but you must think Al Gore is part of the Holy Trinity.
You're the one buying into the IPCC. That's as bad as buying into the WHO. If it's truth you seek, visit the philosophy dept. If it's facts you want, read enough of the science, watch some podcasts. The fact is CO2 follows warming, it does not lead it.The media are irrelevant to the science of global warming. Your fixation on them suggest you haven't used the critical thinking skills your praise. When you start dissecting specific arguments and data in the IPCC reports then I will take you seriously. Until then you are just contributing to the warming by generating hot air.
I tend to share the view of a hard rock researcher of my acquaintance who viewed the Cambrian and up as superficial drift deposits.
No. I am "buying into" the evidence, analysis, hypothesis formation and testing, conducted by many hundreds of experts and assembled and presented by the IPCC after extensive and extended debate.You're the one buying into the IPCC. That's as bad as buying into the WHO. If it's truth you seek, visit the philosophy dept. If it's facts you want, read enough of the science, watch some podcasts. The fact is CO2 follows warming, it does not lead it.
The data is what we follow. You are reasoning emotionally. The Sun has been shown not to be the driving factor behind global warming. People have already posted data for you so I will not bother unless you ask, but they have measured the irradiance of the Sun and if has gone down slightly.The globalists are the ones who are intolerant. E.g. I have no problem with bringing solar power to the market as long as the market decides. I'm far more educated than you in the matter of earth science. You guys are following the concept of correlation means causation. E.g. Al Gore comes along to promote the idea that the earth is rapidly warming up & it's all due to the internal combustion engine. The earth is not rapidly warming up. We have had 1.5 degree rise in temp. There are too many other properties in the universe & the solar system that contribute to climate. You would have us believe that Al Gore, Jim Hansen, John Cook, & Michael Mann are all gods on this issue. You really have to have significant subject background in all the earth sciences. The Sun is the prime driver of climate, not a simple gas that occupies 0.038% of the atmosphere. Why would you entrust anything in the media. As I mentioned in one of my posts, when I was growing up newspaper headlines abounded how we were headed toward an ice age. Thing is mankind does not live long enough to make hearty predictions about the climate.
This argument makes me so mad, I need to smoke a Chesterfield to relax:No. I am "buying into" the evidence, analysis, hypothesis formation and testing, conducted by many hundreds of experts and assembled and presented by the IPCC after extensive and extended debate.
In contrast you appear to be "buying into" oil company propaganda and weak, poorly supported studies.
You're assuming the Sun is on a permanent, general trend of getting weaker. Humans don't live long enough to see what will be the trend if any. Sunspots are currently low-do you know what the Maunder Minimum is. Next you're assuming that global warming is a a permanent trend. The planet has been thru both icehouse & hothouse stages in its history. You are in denial of the fundamental concept that unites all earth science-the Sun drives the climate. We have specific climates for different regions of the globe because a) the planet has unbalanced distribution of landmasses & ocean basins which of course set up different pressure gradients b) the planet has a differentiated atmosphere c) the planet has a differentiated mass which moves pieces of crust around the globe. Such effect precipitates different wind currents, air pressure belts, & zones of microclimate. 50 million years from now the planet's maps will look different again.The data is what we follow. You are reasoning emotionally. The Sun has been shown not to be the driving factor behind global warming. People have already posted data for you so I will not bother unless you ask, but they have measured the irradiance of the Sun and if has gone down slightly.
How can the Sun getting weaker be the driving cause of warming?
The cure for Dunning Kruger is education. i am betting that you do not even understand the Greenhouse Effect. Would you like to learn?
No. I am not making any assumptions. Try again.You're assuming the Sun is on a permanent, general trend of getting weaker. Humans don't live long enough to see what will be the trend if any. Sunspots are currently low-do you know what the Maunder Minimum is. Next you're assuming that global warming is a a permanent trend. The planet has been thru both icehouse & hothouse stages in its history. You are in denial of the fundamental concept that unites all earth science-the Sun drives the climate. We have specific climates for different regions of the globe because a) the planet has unbalanced distribution of landmasses & ocean basins which of course set up different pressure gradients b) the planet has a differentiated atmosphere c) the planet has a differentiated mass which moves pieces of crust around the globe. Such effect precipitates different wind currents, air pressure belts, & zones of microclimate. 50 million years from now the planet's maps will look different again.
Quite right - you should always look behind the headlines to see what the consensus of published peer-reviewed research is telling you.My point is on the media is I don't buy all the garbage the media has put out to advance the cause of global warming.