The Historyscoper's Climate Watch: What scientific evidence do opponents of climate change and global warming use to support their view?

Wednesday, April 10, 2019

What scientific evidence do opponents of climate change and global warming use to support their view?

https://www.quora.com/What-scientific-evidence-do-opponents-of-climate-change-and-global-warming-use-to-support-their-view/

My reply:

It’s too early yet to know if we are entering a mini ice age, and frequent super-cold winter spells could be a warning, but there’s no question that CO2 does not cause global warming because it’s just a trace component of the atmosphere that cools the Earth’s surface daily. Who cares if it has risen from 300 parts per million to 400? That’s 0.04%, or 4 parts in ten thousand. CO2 has been deliberately framed by global Marxists for power and control in their plans to foist a one-world Marxist govt., and scientific organizations are now all suspect of being hijacked to tamper with the data to push their false narrative that’s really based on unfalsifiable predictions decades in the future. Back in the 1930s when CO2 was still in the 300s we had far worse heat waves that tore the world apart. Now NOAA and NASA are claiming a whopping 0.8C of global warming since 1880, which is not detectable by any living thing, only with their complex computer programs. The biggest con is to pretend to know the global average temperature when the only reliable temperature measuring stations are in the U.S., which has shown no warming, and should be used to tame the wild measurements from other countries rather than the other way around. This science hijacking has happened before, with the fake acid rain scare.

Corruption of the US Temperature Record
Climate Alarmists Follow Acid Rain Scare Playbook
Top Aussie Scientist Reveals UN IPCC Greenhouse Gas 'Errors' | PSI Intl

The frequent statements by Marxists that the entire fossil fuel industry must go, even natural gas, are proof of a master conspiracy to foist world Marxism, and to them science is a punch line. It’s a logical fallacy to claim that the answer to high atmospheric CO2 is to stop emitting more, because technology can come up with alternatives like capturing it and turning it into fuel, although CO2 is actually plant food and the world needs more not less to green the deserts and feed the teeming billions.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/26/climate-change-denial-is-evil-says-mary-robinson
What’s Really Wrong With the Green New Deal | The American Spectator | Politics is too important to be taken seriously.

Meanwhile honest scientists are tracing the detectable mild variations in global temps to natural forces that have cycles.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/01/10/global-warming-no-natural-predictable-climate-change/

Read my essay disproving the CO2 greenhouse warming theory forever. It speaks truth to power and nobody can answer it, only try to ignore it or face that there’s a trillion dollar hoax underway and find out for themselves that there’s a massive conspiracy to stifle the truth in the leftist-controlled media, which has grown so unhinged that some are even blaming global warming on cow farts.

Researchers conclude livestock have no detectable effect on climate
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change

No comments:

What Is the Antarctic Volcanoes Project?

It's too bad the current brouhaha about CO2 is so narrowly focused. So what if a higher concentration in the atmosphere raises global average temps? If higher temps were accompanied by increased atmospheric moisture, it would even out around the world and turn it into a paradise planet, greening the deserts so that the teeming billions could be fed. Cold temperatures are inimical to life, not a goal of life.

Too bad, it might take a lot more CO2 than you think to really change the global weather, but not because it has any control over Earth's surface temperatures. In fact atmospheric CO2 can't melt an ice cube with its 15 micron main radiation wavelength that has a Planck radiation temperature of -80C, colder than dry ice (-78.5C).

Why do they call CO2 greenhouse gas? Because plants breathe it, and they pump it into greenhouses to help them grow and thrive. Polar regions and deserts look good in postcards, but who wants to live there. Meanwhile global pop. is zooming, so obviously the real answer is to pump more CO2 and water vapor into the atmosphere to turn the Earth into a greenhouse, turning deserts both hot and cold into lush green crop-growing regions like 35 million years ago when the avg. global temp was 88F and the CO2 level was 1K parts per million (vs. 415 PPM today). So what if we lose some desert polar regions and even some yummy coastline, the adjustments will be inconvenient but temporary, but I prefer shirt-sleeve weather to Frosty the Snowman. How many arctic animals can't adapt to a warmer climate? What animal needs to live in ice and snow and wouldn't like a vacation to Tahiti? They can lose the fat, hair or feathers.

The real question is can we make and keep the global CO2/H20 levels high enough, and for how long? Sooner or later mass global starvation will become unstoppable if world pop. keeps climbing, and this is the way to forestall it, if we act soon enough. Don't give me them Malthusian objections, give me some CO2/H20 solutions. I like a paradise Earth in the possibility window.

So, while the world is debating the horrors, extent or lack thereof of global warming caused by CO2, let's engineer the CO2/H20 solution to making the Earth a warm temperate planet from pole to pole with no deserts or ice wastelands, allowing vastly more food to be grown and turning poor nations rich. I DON'T mean a planet with wild swings between super-hot summers and super-cold winters, but one that is warmer than now everywhere, but moister and greener, with a giant network of plant life helping to avoid extremes. Since CO2 and water vapor are the keys, and the paltry amounts in the atmosphere need to be increased as soon as possible to turn deserts green and get the warming process off to a good start, but the new levels have to be maintained permanently, I'm looking to remote Antarctica (which is really a sea) as the most promising source for unlimited CO2 and water vapor generation, given that noxious emissions (sulfur dioxide, etc.) can be controlled.

This blog is for posting news on the world climate situation, scientific and political, along with my own articles. I'm sure it will start out with hardly any interest or followers, but I'm hoping that it will attract the smartest people eventually and in the end I hope for a global consensus that if it can be done it must be done.

So what is the Antarctic Volcanoes Project? My working idea is that an international effort to reactivate as many volcanoes in Antarctica as possible in an ideal location for distributing the CO2/H20 will produce the best and most cost-effective results. Sorry, one-worlders, it won't give you a license to override and control any country's economy, but if your country is suffering from lack of food you will be too busy expanding farming to care. Hence until I think of or hear about a better way to increase world CO2/H20 levels, this is my pet project. If you are a scientist, please climb aboard my AVP Express and let's make it happen.

It Would Be Funny If It Were's So Sad

It would be funny it weren't so sad, but when the scientists say "greenhouse gas" they are using a malaprop. It should be greenhouse GLASS, because that's why a greenhouse stays warm, by glass walls stopping convection of air and trapping heat. Yes, CO2 is pumped into greenhouses, but not for heating purposes, only to help plants BREATHE. So the whole sucker's game of "greenhouse gas" must truly be for the purpose of stopping more vegetation from growing and feeding the teeming billions. Is that their true goal? Another blip on the horizon is the promise of melting permafrost releasing gigantic amounts of CO2 from the Arctic not Antarctic sector. Let's hope we at least get some more good CO2 that way.

Jan. 14, 2011. Good article on CO2 levels and global temps 30-40 million years ago