Catastrophic Global Warming and the Medieval Warm Period. I wrote a take down (actually many) of Global Warming years ago at KAI. When KAI died, I switched over to Steemit and recycled some of my KAI posts.
I was re-working that thread for Steemit when I got busy on new projects, so never finished it. New horizons sucked the energy I'd previously applied to posting.
A colleague asked me about AGW the other day, so I put it on Steemit. If you want to read it, here's the link:
Re: Catastrophic Global Warming and the Medieval Warm Period. I believe that AGW is true because if you look at some of the researchers, they have specialized on soot being a more likely heat absorber than co2 or methane.
I believe that its smarter for us to power ourselves with sun & wind, unless you can come up with a ready-to-go safe uranium or even fusion reactors? No? I didn't think so.
Having said this, the Greens always talk about regulation, government rule, aka like the Soviet Union. The climate scientists never yak about solar and wind, but usually indicate that "it's no use for technology to help."
There was a German scientist who recently felt that the Antarctic was melting because of humans (not undersea volcanos) and that we could use 12000 wind turbines to power a refrigeration system to freeze the melt!!! I figure if we can refreeze the Antarctic, we can power humanity, easy and cheap.
Re: Catastrophic Global Warming and the Medieval Warm Period. Red, the problem I have with your article is the same problem I have with any article on climate change. You present lots of graphs and other forms of data and you interpret them like ‘this shows X’. Fair enough. But then, I check out some other guy’s paper and here too I see graphs and other forms of data, only he tells me ‘this shows Y’. I have no way of telling how those incomprehensible datasets should be interpreted, and therefore who is telling the truth and who is lying or just honestly mistaken, and the reason why not is because I am no climate scientist.
I find it quite suspect the way so many people who don’t have the expertise to speak authoritatively on such things claim that we know AGW is happening. Yes, one can show images of marine life being harmed by plastic littering our oceans and blame that on human activity, because there is no other way in which plastic debris could get into our oceans.
But if you show a hurricane causing havoc in New Orleans or a downpour flooding villages in India or icebergs forming in Antarctica, I have no way of telling if those phenomenon are attributable to human activity or if they are natural weather events that have always been happening.
Even if we do now have climactic conditions caused by industrial activity i(like I said, I don’t know if that’s the case or not) we should not forget that climate change is itself not just a consequence of burning greenhouse gases. Geological and historical evidence makes it quite clear that our planet has undergone climate change as a natural part of its evolution. This means that ultimately, whether AGW is a real thing or not, we probably cannot do anything to prevent climate change (well, maybe post-singularity godlike AIs can do something...). All we can really do is try and adapt to whatever the future has in store for us.
Re: Catastrophic Global Warming and the Medieval Warm Period. Given our tech orientation, here on EV and back in KAI - yes to Extie.
We can deal with is now, if we wanted to, with current-gen nukes. Which seem to be safer by far then the older gen that are the ones that have glitched.
And - the two big coal power plant countries, China and India, who claim to really believe this stuff, plan to build thousands of those plants between them.
"I believe Coal Plants will kill the planet."
"I will build thousands of coal plants."
With that kind of mind-set behind the "CO2 Alarmist" idea, it's clear that not only do they not really believe it at the top.
Given our ability, in the First World and Developing World, if most of us really believed in that alarmist stuff - we would all devote tone of bucks - that would hurt, but we could do it - to building the nukes that would do it.
So yeah, absolutely - as we get more "tech oomph," lets just power-on.
Even though the alarm-mongers will keep on keepin' on themselves.
Re: Catastrophic Global Warming and the Medieval Warm Period. Extropia and Doc, It is pretty easy to understand.
1. Co2 is saturated so additions of more Co2 will have a miniscule impact on global temperature. This graph says it all. It's just real science:
2. The issue taken up in my Steemit piece was whether the Medieval Warming was as large as today. But there are other temperature reconstructions (like from ice cores) that show that the earth has had oscillating temperatures through out it's history that long predates man:
3. NOAA has been falsifying the temperature record. This article should be read. It's easy to understand:
Re: Catastrophic Global Warming and the Medieval Warm Period. Look, the USA, the UK, have, for decades switched to natural gas versus plentiful coal. Nukes have declined because they are so expensive to build and maintain, that this has eliminated their growth worldwide.
I try to produce energy articles everyday, because I have seen this issue, whether you tie it to climate or not, as being existential.
I do and do and do for you kids and what thanks do I get? Tsk!
Re: Catastrophic Global Warming and the Medieval Warm Period.
I have seen this issue [power source], whether you tie it to climate or not, as being existential.
It would be existential if we ran out of fuel. The U.S. was in crisis when they killed all the whales, which were a major source of whale oil to fuel lamps. They didn't want to be plunged back into darkness! Well, they went out and found bountiful Pennsylvania crude. Problem solved. Plus the whales were able to rebound. Win-win.
There simply isn't any energy crisis now. I confidently predict, there never will be. I'm also sure that wind and solar will never amount to a hill of beans. Can we please stop the senseless slaughter of raptors???
Re: Catastrophic Global Warming and the Medieval Warm Period. >Extropia and Doc, It is pretty easy to understand.<
You are quite right. Your graph, with its captions and explanation of what it all means, is easy to understand.
But, then again, there must be persuasive graphs and statistics that show climate change to be something we should take very seriously indeed. If it was plain to see from the facts that there is nothing to worry about, why would there be such protest against inaction on what is (so you say) a non-issue? Why would there be intergovernmental conferences on this issue when it is no issue at all and just a natural cycle that has always been going on?
I can only conclude that all those people found out something that persuaded them to take this issue seriously. It could be that they were misinformed. Doubtless, they would accuse you of being misinformed. I don’t know who has the facts.
Why do you think solar power will never amount to a hill of beans?