F. Swemson thinks we’re fighting against the climate alarmists in the wrong way
It seems like there’s a new article appearing almost daily on the Internet with new and shocking evidence that the entire manmade global warming story has been a hoax. But is anyone really listening or doing anything about it?
They’re starting to pay attention in Europe, but America, like an environmentalist Don Quixote, just keeps tilting at the climate change windmill. For over three years, residents of the Northeast have been paying for worthless carbon credits in every electric bill they pay. The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative is a cap-and-trade system that’s already bilked citizens of the nine member states out of over a billion dollars, and most people in those states are totally unaware that this is going on. I recently compared my electric bill to a friend’s from NYC and found that he was paying almost four times what I’m paying per KWh.
It’s not surprising because for the most part, when we attack the climate alarmists, we usually do so in the wrong way and mostly for the wrong reasons.
Prior to Climategate, our primary argument against cap-and-trade laws, was that the potential benefits were too meager for the enormous costs involved. But there were no benefits! CO2 is a beneficial trace gas that’s one of the cornerstones of all life on earth. It’s NOT a pollutant. There’s no such thing as a carbon footprint unless you’re a coal miner and still wearing your work boots. You don’t attack a bogus idea by granting the validity of its underlying scientific premise up front. By pandering to the eco-fascists in this way, we’re playing word games that are hurting us in the long run.
None of the new scientific reports and studies that prove global warming is a hoax are ever seen in the major media, and even if they were, they’re above most people’s heads, or at least outside their attention span. Instead we need to keep repeating the basic scientific facts about climate change: 1) That climate change drives CO2 levels, and 2) That the earth in fact is relatively cool right now, and that constantly changing cycles of solar activity are the real reason for climate change. We also need to start mentioning the most ironic part of this farce, the fact that warming is good!. The only type of climate change that’s dangerous to us is extreme cooling. Man and all other forms of life have always thrived during the earth’s warm periods, while every extreme cold period has brought suffering, starvation and death. It doesn’t take an atmospheric physicist to understand why this is true. Crops don’t grow well when it gets cold. Crop failures cause famines, which kill both people and their domestic animals thru malnutrition and reduced resistance to disease.
We also must stop using the words “Greenhouse Gases.” The Earth is not like a greenhouse and in our atmosphere we have Atmospheric gases.
Wrong. There is undeniably an atmospheric “greenhouse gases” effect, and any attempt to idiotically refuse acknowledgement of that fact simply serves the Watermelon “Liberal’ fascists’ contention that those of us who deny the validity of their Cargo Cult Science are ourselves illiterate in the sciences.
As you, wilbert sure as hell are, ain’tcha?
The only viable counterattack against the preposterous “man-made global warming” horsepuckey is scrupulously bulletproof adherence to sound science, which always and at every turn proves the alarmists a bunch of flaming fraudsters.
-
A century or so too late to address nomenclature wilbert. We have addressed “like a greenhouse” many times but it is ultimately futile. The only points of interest are that there is an effect which keeps the lower atmosphere warmer than earth’s effective emission temperature and whether adding more infrared absorbers will dangerously increase that effect.
We need to create a new religion to counteract the Green Religion…..maybe Familys Come first reiligion or ???? Green is a political religion……it’s based on faith and hostility to non believers. Facts and reality aren’t part of it!
No such thing. This is not a matter of “religion” but rather a cadre of climate quacks who’ve suckered large numbers of fundamentally stupid and gullible damned fools into falling for an elaborate and carefully crafted fraud.
Our point is not to convert them into another “faith” but to make atheists of ‘em. There is no god in this machine, and the friggin’ gears never ever meshed to begin with.
“Facts and reality” is the only thing that there’s ever been, and grinding their swinish snouts in that knowledge is both bitter necessity and our gleeful pleasure.
I would insert the word: natural in front of ‘climate change’. as some might assume human caused.
Always remind people that there has been a general warming trend since the last ice age, about thirteen thousand years. There’s been some variability in that trend. Overall, it’s getting warmer. That’s a good thing. Cold is dead. Warmth promotes life.
In Norway the warmest period was 8.000 BP – 5.300 BP, a period where mostly all glaciers where gone. And first reestablished since 5.300 BP.
The glacier maxima for mainland Norway last 10.000 years is around 1750, LIA. And for Svalbard the glacier maxima is around 1920.
So the Holocene maxima happend long time ago and we basically have been moving toward the comming iceage for the last 5.300 years. It’s not getting warmer it’s getting colder!
Since the media loves sensationalism, the best way to fight the alarmists is to begin publishing papers using their solutions, i.e., green energy, and clearly show how food and energy will no longer be available to the poor and the middle class. Make it simple.Tell them how the UN will identify what people will be allowed food and electricity. Tell them how the UN will identify US citizens who won’t get access to food or power. Use simple numbers using actual output of the green junk showing the net loss of reliable electric generation and the impact on the food supply, and all other job sectors.
Personally, I thought the way to kill it would be to show problems with the CO2 record. Fund studies that would measure dissolved CO2 in ice compared to the bubbles in ice cores and try to measure observe any diffusion that occurs with trapped bubbles at high pressures in a lab.
There is another way to kill it and that is “common sense” how can gas trap gas. Unless you have a plastic sheet up there you can not prevent hot gas from rising. But more CO2 gas or any kind of gas up there will prevent suns radiation from reaching the earths surface which will result in Global cooling not warming.
We should be happy that we’re in an interglacial period with relatively warm, comfortable conditions. I’m not worried about global warming at all; I’m much more worried about global cooling because that will inevitably result in a new glacial period.It will definitely happen sometime in the future and when it does I hope mankind will be prepared.
Wow..there are a few people posting on here has been horribly misinformed about climate change. An increase in temperature of 4 degrees Celsius has been modeled to show a decrease in rainfall of about 60% (think about what that would mean for agriculture). Warming is definitely not good for us at all. You should read and understand the information presented in peer reviewed journal articles before you come to any conclusions.
Since When are Climate Models “Proof”. Climate models are always wrong. there Projections are wrong so therefore it is WRONG. Until you can perfectly model a planetary atmosphere perfectly your assertion is 100% false. Science is NOT about computer models. Computer models are made by imperfect and infallible men. In this case imperfect-rent-seeking-fund-hording-pseudoscientists. Climate Science is not falsifiable so it is not science.
An increase in temperature of 4 degrees Celsius has been modeled to show a decrease in rainfall of about 60% …
Could you, um, explain why that is, Professor? Isn’t “global warming” expected to occur at relatively constant rh?
If that is so, there is more water vapor in the atmosphere at any given time at higher average temperatures, but the total water vapor in the atmosphere must remain constant (to within a couple of days, anyway).
Please make sure that what you are saying makes sense before you start barfing out statements about “jumping to conclusions”
No theory or hypothesis is worthy of any consideration unless it implies the sort of evidence which would discredit same.Whenever I engage alrmists in debate about the issue,I ask what would prove them wrong.When they concede that they cannot answer the question,I point out that the socalled scientists espousing the theory have claimed that global warming causes more snow,less snow,record snow and lack of snow.The same situation applies for rainfall.Invariably,they agree that science ,inter alia,is about falsifiability,and assure me that they will reconsider their position.
At 9:46 PM on 7 March, Spadecaller had written of the AGW alarmists:
And you believed even one of them?
In this as in everything else you get from these Watermelons, “doveryai, no proveryai.”
When you actually see one of them “reconsider,” then you can count their scientific and moral rectitude on the way to establishment. Not before.