AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

[KeithE]

[Jim]

The frantic warming alarmism in the U.S. account U.S. insensitivity is misplaced. During 1960-2013, the metric tons per capita of CO2 emitted in the U.S. increased by 2.5%, virtually negligible given population growth. During the same period, that figure for China was 533%, and for India 433%, both countries still frantically building coal-fired power plants that are hardly regulated. Source:
. Do your own extrapolations to check the figures. For the world, the increase was 66%. CO2 increase is inevitable because the population of the world is growing but the U.S has regulated itself into stability. According to NASA, , the annual global warming increase from 1960 to 2010 was .7 degrees while the mean (5-yr.) increase was .4 degrees. Climate is cyclical so no one knows when it will change, no matter the models (or hoaxes). It changed radically in the mid-1940s and could do so again. In any case, there's no reason to believe the sky is falling.

[William Thornton]

Trump will issue an executive order on Day One to sto global warming...or at least stop foolish spending schemes that reward thieves with gummit money in the forlorn and fraudulent expectation that they will do the least thing to affect climate change.

[KeithE]

[David Flick]

[William Thornton]

Maybe the chinmoku should mean Keith disengages from David, not David disengages from the subject. I have a suspicion that Keith, from whom I've learned a thing or two on the subject, is incapable of letting David's stuff sit unchallenged.

Let the jousting continue...

[KeithE]

[David Flick]

[William Thornton]

I chimed in...got chinmokoed. Should have gotten a golden spur.

[David Flick]

[Jim]

[KeithE]

[Jim]

K: Jim, I’m practically sure I cannot convince of the threat posed by global warming since you appear to be stuck in a “skeptical” stance (your sarcasm points that way). But I thought I’d answer your attempted claims even though all these facts have been blogged about before on BL several times, But I'm not sure they were answered during periods when you were active on BL. Here’s hoping that you reach above the sarcasm to the scientific facts.

You just don’t get it.  I stated that I use data just as you do.  Our difference lies in the interpretation.  It’s not a matter of sarcasm but it could be a matter concerning preconceived notions.  You’re hip and thigh with man-made global warming and I believe that warming and cooling are affected more by sunspot activity than by earthbound activity.  There is a plethora of articles complete with charts devised by credible measurements (comprehensive data) on the Internet concerning sunspot activity vis-à-vis the climate.  I’m convinced that this explains change better than anything else.  It involves the difference in approaches.  Yours is that man largely determines climate-change. Mine is that the sun practically solely determines climate-change on the basis of its activity.  Sunspot numbers have been determined to observe 11-year cycles.  During periods of high sunspot activity, temps are likely to increase.  During periods of low activity, cooling takes place, and credible numbers are available for the last 400 years.   In modern times (1645-1715 the lowest temps in a thousand years at the time) the number of sunspots stayed fairly low, meaning cooler temps.  The years surrounding this 70-year period is called the Little Ice Age, as you know, for Europe and North America.  The important element is the sun’s electro-magnetic activity that has a great deal to do with clouds that can deflect the sun’s ultra-violet rays back toward the sun instead of toward the earth, depending for quantity (temperature) on the number of sunspots that are present at a specific time.  I’m not going to reproduce all these data-things here because you and anyone else can find them with a touch of the key.  Currently, the sunspot cycle is downward and is predicted to bottom out about 2019-2020. That might explain no substantial warming for nearly the past 20 years. I’m sure you’re aware of this approach, so we simply disagree. I appreciate your degree of sarcasm. I can't match it.
 

[KeithE]

[Jim]

K: There is no 11 year cycle in the earth’s temperature, period. Look at the plots (both with thermometer- based and satellite=based) I previously posted repeated here.


I didn’t say the climate/temperature changes in 11-year cycles. Obviously, it doesn’t. It changes during much longer periods when the COLLECTIVE number of sunspots is up or down. The chart in this piece,, is instructive, as is the article, in which is noted, also, that other phenomena happen within the sun with repercussions accruing to the earth’s conditions, depending upon which part of the earth is affected at a particular time. The subject is ideal in that it shows the number of sunspots appearing by actual count from roughly 1600 until now, a significant change from very cold, then up and down, then fairly normal, the current condition. These changes in the sun affect lots of other cosmic entities, not just the earth. Man may think he can change the climate, but he’s whistling in the dark. He has absolutely no control over the sun, which is the controlling agent, and little, if any, concerning the earth. He can change low-altitude atmospheric conditions such as getting rid of acid rain but can’t even eliminate smog or get rid of a dust-storm. The CO2 alarmism is all about cap-and-trade, a political entity, with the scientists who cooked up the “problem” for the UN, but then through their stupidity concerning emails blowing the whistle on their skullduggery, effectively demonstrating monstrous dishonesty.

[Jim]

The climate alarmists remind of 2001 (9/11 in particular) when republican Bush 43 became president after eight years of democrat Bill Clinton despite the effort of the Florida Supreme Court to steal the election for Gore.  The elite Bush-haters got up a document (close to 100 signers if memory serves) actually accusing Bush of being in on the crumbling of the WTC.  Think Gen. Wesley Clarke. Currently, the Trump-haters are blaming Trump for not doing something to stop the earth from burning, ergo, being in on the melting/burning, whatever, a very wicked man. 
 
More to the point is the arrogance of the alarmists, who, despite no significant success in connecting CO2, man-made or otherwise, to climate change, are determined to force the U.S. into even more regulations.  Their ability to make measurements, charts and demonstrably proven inaccurate computer models does not deter them.  For people of faith, God created the cosmos according to his design, which indicates that God and not man controls the sun’s locus and sphere of influence, including the earth, the clearer implication being that God, not man, controls the earth.  The simple fact that climate has changed throughout history under diverse conditions, sometimes radically according to the experts (industrialization or not, for instance), means that outside (God’s) forces, not men’s forces, change earth’s fundamental conditions.  This is why the sunspot theory is eminently superior to the man-made stuff regarding the climate.  The sunspots are of God while man-made stuff is of man, who can’t create anything, only uses the elements God has already created.  Both sunspot and man-made explanations are just theories, as is the tectonic theory for explaining earthquakes.  The diameter of the earth is 7,926 miles at the equator (40 less pole to pole), but the deepest hole ever drilled (Kola Peninsula—Russia) went down 7.6 miles, a distance so miniscule by comparison that man has no idea what the interior comprises, whether tectonic plates or anything else.  He can only theorize and conjecture as to earth’s inner temperature, for instance.  So…every man to his own common sense or presuppositions concerning the climate.  He can’t prove a thing, though the sunspot approach makes far more sense, common or otherwise.

Of course, the ambitious anthropologist comes along occasionally with his mind-boggling discovery of the “missing link” only to admit a bit later that his newest batch of bones turns out to be just another orangutan or Cro-Magnon creature, after all. One wonders if God laughs or is just plain disgusted at all the efforts man makes to prove himself smarter than the Creator, ferreting out all the secrets like osmosis, for instance, or why cigar smoke still makes me drool 60 years after smoking my last one.
 

[William Thornton]

Jim wrote: "The elite Bush-haters got up a document (close to 100 signers if memory serves) actually accusing Bush of being in on the crumbling of the WTC."

Careful Jim, you are about to release the hounds with this.

[KeithE]

[KeithE]

[Jim]

[KeithE]

[Jim]

[David Flick]

[William Thornton]

Three cheers for

Of course, I don't recall, ever, trees still having leaves on Thanksgiving.

[Jim]