The Historyscoper's Climate Watch: Why, when presented with factual evidence, do people still dismiss climate change?

Sunday, April 28, 2019

Why, when presented with factual evidence, do people still dismiss climate change?

https://www.quora.com/Why-when-presented-with-factual-evidence-do-people-still-dismiss-climate-change/answer/TL-Winslow

My reply:

What factual evidence? A bad forest fire, hurricane, cold spell? We had that back before CO2 levels were considered an issue, for example, the super-hot 1930s. Factual evidence of climate change rather than mere extreme weather would be year after year of temperatures way above or below the historical norms, with, for example, no snow in the winter, or snow all summer.
This has never happened, sorry. Instead, there has long been an insidious evil globalist Marxist conspiracy to hijack scientific organizations in the name of slaying the false dragon of CO2 by destroying the fossil fuel industry and all of capitalism with it, so they can attain their real goal of a Marxist utopia built on the ashes. Sorry, but the best NASA, NOAA et al. can do to twist historical temperature data results in a claimed 0.8C of global warming since 1880, not enough to notice except with computers, and highly suspect of being bogus
The evil intentions and ulterior motives are shown by automatic dismissal of safe workable nuclear energy as the alternative to fossil fuels in favor of unworkable renewable energy, and a plethora of overhyped alarmist articles claiming that plants, animals, and insects, even coral are already suffering severe effects from the microscopic claimed warming, as if they used computers too, are unable to adapt to gradual changes, and have 100+-year lifespans to boot. Too bad, for the Marxists, outside the core anti-U.S. U.N. countries, which know the real game of steal the U.S. blind, intelligent people aren’t buying it, especially Pres. Trump, who is appointing a panel to investigate the true situation.

World of Change: Global Temperatures
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-stunning-statistical-fraud-behind-the-global-warming-scare/
Data Tampering At USHCN/GISS
The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever
Global Warming Is A Communist Plot
Climate alarmists aren’t trying to save the planet, they want communism in America
Only socialism can solve global warming crisis say Communists
Retired physicist leading new Trump effort to question climate threat to security
Batteries Cannot Make Renewables Reliable
BBC Accused Of Serious Errors And Misleading Statements In David Attenborough’s Climate Show

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