tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post933766387044528889..comments2023-10-01T16:53:17.274+01:00Comments on Cicero's Songs: Getting Real about Climate ChangeCicerohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02090838836212624633noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-61591336142462428482009-11-27T23:20:16.863+00:002009-11-27T23:20:16.863+00:00Those in favour of global warming ( and I meant th...Those in favour of global warming ( and I meant that ) actually do so with a specific political objective. It is the objective of all manufactured emergencies from ‘Krystallnacht’ onwards , a power grab, and suspension of accountability .It is usually conceived as a reason for collectivist of elitist solutions such a socialism of or the EU. There no obvious reason why multi state empires or socialism should be any better at solving this problem than they have been at getting the drains fixed ,but it is a “higher purposes” , and the left love a good reason to shut everyone up.<br /> I am not a denier though , I am pretty convinced something is happening but here is my second problem .<br />The amount of ice in the world is increasing . Fact . Glaciers which are getting larger have been filmed in Spring and shown as dramatic examples of global warming , also fact . The is called lying .<br />It is also true that if you turn off the freezer it fills with ice , that’s is why in the ant-artic ice is increasing but in the Artic where it is on the sea , for the most part it is shrinking . Here you have an ice cube in warm water effect. Its like dipping democracy in socialism <br />So the changes in ice patterns can support a convincing model of global warming but you have to ignore the utter bilge coming from doomsters together with their dying Polar Bears ( vastly increased in number since the 60s )<br />So no , I am not a denier ,but that does not means signing up for being patronised lied to and lead into world government via treaties or collectivist responses . So when catastrophe enthusiasts talk about obdurate unreasonableness ,they ought to think a little harder about who started lying, why they started, and what they can do to clean their act up.Newmaniahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11922161971821380803noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-22045351611572669402009-11-25T12:05:51.761+00:002009-11-25T12:05:51.761+00:00The most complete, in spite of the ambiguous title...The most complete, in spite of the ambiguous title, is the pdf dated October 14 at http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true .Dan Pangburnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06415209665316338083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-57705515494329421432009-11-25T09:37:20.905+00:002009-11-25T09:37:20.905+00:00Dan- could you post a link to your work please?Dan- could you post a link to your work please?Cicerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02090838836212624633noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-72185844300981511892009-11-25T00:30:25.554+00:002009-11-25T00:30:25.554+00:00Cicero,
It is unclear what caveats you are referri...Cicero,<br />It is unclear what caveats you are referring to. I used none.<br />My research produces an excellent match to measured average global temperatures for the entire 20th century and so far in the 21st with no consideration whatsoever of change to CO2 or any other ghg. That shows quite clearly that change to CO2 level has no significant effect on average global temperature. There is no risk of significant temperature increase. There is risk of planet cooling, crop failure and famine.Dan Pangburnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06415209665316338083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-84289941871494646882009-11-24T19:16:42.771+00:002009-11-24T19:16:42.771+00:00"We are injecting great instability into a fi..."We are injecting great instability into a fiercely complicated system, that we still do not fully understand."<br /><br />What we do understand about it is that, contrary to what you imply, it's not a stable system anyway. The whole term "climate change" ignores the fact that "climate stability" is impossible.LSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-91925273594746389622009-11-24T11:58:55.739+00:002009-11-24T11:58:55.739+00:00It isn't a debate if alternative views are cen...It isn't a debate if alternative views are censored. It isn't civilised if things are censored for being true.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-85789780067383090932009-11-24T11:55:16.260+00:002009-11-24T11:55:16.260+00:00Hi Tim, of course that is not what I mean about mo...Hi Tim, of course that is not what I mean about moving quickly- we clearly need to set realistic priorities. personally I think that the scrapping of Ignalina early was a big mistake for the Lithuanians. However I would say that the Desertec project does look quite promising, and would advocate a rapid expsnsion in research here.<br /><br />Dan- actually, and given all the scientific caveats, I would suggestthat the evidence is quite clear that there is a relationship between higher CO2 concentrations and significant climate change. Even if you are not yet convinced, I think that even the potential risks are so significant that it would be petty irresponsible not to take action.<br />Joe- you cynic you!<br />Neil- another nasty and irrelevent rant. Since you continually post comments that are unacceptable (and occasionally actionable) in any civilisd debate I am afraid I am going to continue to block your comments unless you substantially change your tone and content.Cicerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02090838836212624633noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-27983086399164747782009-11-23T20:44:50.725+00:002009-11-23T20:44:50.725+00:00Cicero, you speak as if you have actually read the...Cicero, you speak as if you have actually read the Skeptical Environmentalist. <br /><br />That's not really the done thing, apparently, if you are going to comment on it.Joe Ottenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18380362092159905533noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-42568861141307785802009-11-23T20:20:08.433+00:002009-11-23T20:20:08.433+00:00Tens of billions of dollars have been wasted in fu...Tens of billions of dollars have been wasted in futile efforts to prove that added CO2 caused Global Warming while an unpaid engineer with a home computer has discovered what really caused the temperature run-up in the 20th century.<br /><br />All of the average global temperatures for the entire 20th century and so far in the 21st century are readily and accurately determined with no consideration whatsoever needed of changes to the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide or any other greenhouse gas.<br /><br />Data sources, an eye-opening graph that overlays the measured and calculated temperatures from 1880 to 2008 and a detailed description of the method are in the paper dated October 14 at http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true .<br /><br />This research shows that there is no significant Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) (and therefore no human caused climate change) from added atmospheric carbon dioxide or any other added greenhouse gas.Dan Pangburnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06415209665316338083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-61205707339650328822009-11-23T18:09:29.659+00:002009-11-23T18:09:29.659+00:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15037609.post-31620720169133252822009-11-23T17:58:40.523+00:002009-11-23T17:58:40.523+00:00"If we do things now, the costs and consequen..."If we do things now, the costs and consequences are likely to be dramatically lower than if we wait."<br /><br />Ah, no, wrong way round. If we pile in now and try to change everything quickly the costs of mediation will be vastly higher than if we take our time about thins.<br /><br />As one example, if we scrap generating plants before their obsolescence, this costs us a fortune. If we replace them with new, lower emission, technology only once they are obsolete this costs us a great deal less.<br /><br />As another: solar PV is no yet a mature technology and as such is hugely expensive. The German system of feed in tariffs and other subsidies costs $1,070 per tonne CO2 not emitted. The cost of a tonne emitted (as per Stern) is $80. So that's a $990 loss on each tonne there. Going gangbusters to install the next (or even next after that) technology of solar PV would be a much ,much , cheaper option.Tim Worstallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13161727860817121071noreply@blogger.com