Posted on 11/11/2015 9:17:26 PM PST by dennisw
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
As the upcoming Paris COP21 climate conference hurtles towards an inevitable train wreck of green disappointments, climate activists are already starting to prepare the faithful, for the bitter upsets they are likely to suffer over the next few weeks.
According to Australian SBS;
There’s no question that we must hold our political leaders to account in Paris and push in every way possible for a strong global agreement, which includes Australia carrying its fair weight in emissions reduction and climate finance.
But, instead of expecting these talks to deliver final solutions to the climate crisis, we should also pay close attention to the many forms of action occurring all over the world, particularly on the streets where the largest ever People’s Climate March will take place in cities from Melbourne to Montreal, from Brisbane to Barcelona.
What occurs inside the negotiating rooms of the Paris climate conference is obviously crucial, but the real barometer of global momentum is taking place elsewhere.
All over the world we are hearing from people who have found themselves impacted by climate change and are increasingly frustrated by governments pressing on in a ‘business as usual’ mode, ignoring accumulated and compelling climate science and blithely approving new coal mines and thwarting the transition to clean energy.
Read more: http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/11/12/comment-people-power-force-behind-action-climate-change
Given the dramatic Asian race for coal, driven by billions of poor people demanding a better life, it seems very likely that Australian coal production, and coal production elsewhere, will rise dramatically in the near future. Greens are in for a lot more disappointments, if they expect politicians to stand in the path of this coming deluge of new resource tax revenue.
“push in every way possible for a strong global agreement, which includes Australia carrying its fair weight in emissions reduction and climate finance. “
Ha ha. Climate finance being the key goal here. Give us money and we’ll save the world.
What is the crisis this week - global warming or the new ice age? Or maybe all of it in one day?
FYI, in case you didn't hear.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-3300683/French-weatherman-fired-slamming-climate-conference.html
[[All over the world we are hearing from people who have found themselves impacted by climate change]]
Really? And they know it is ‘climate change’ and not ‘NATURAL cyclical weather changes’ HOW exactly? How precisely do they determine that it is ‘climate change’ brought on by man as opposed to climate change that occurs naturally? What instruments are they using to determine that this climate change is somehow different from AL<L NATURALY cyclical weather changes throughout the history of the world?
Good golly people are thick! The amount of CO2 in our atmosphere due to man takes up just 0.0036% of the atmosphere-
Would someone please ask these ‘people all over the word who find themselves impacted by climate change’ to explain to us how 0.0036% of our atmosphere can possibly change the globe’s whole climates? Let’s get these brilliant minds explaining it to us-
These dolts don’t even realize how little CO2 man actually produces compared to our total atmosphere’s volume
Say you have a football stadium with 10,000 seats. You take a representative sampling of atmospheric gasses and put one molecule of atmospheric gasses in each seat. Three seats would have CO2 molecules sitting in them
… In Asia alone this year power companies are building more than 500 coal-fired plants, with at least a thousand more on planning boards.
Make no mistake, the real message coming out of Paris is a devastating blow to the AGW Nexus: The vast majority of the world rejects AGW Hysteria… building 1,500 coal-fired generating plants in Asia during the next few years is the most unkindest rebuke possible… far more cutting than an army of skeptical denialists arguing with loopy Greenies and professional opportunists posing as Climate Scientists.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/11/11/climate-activists-bracing-for-failure-at-paris/
Hope the conference isn’t cancelled by a snowstorm.
Out of 25,000 seats, ONE seat would have an “anthropogenic” CO2 molecule in it.
And how many seats would be filled with H2O molecules?
Please tell this uneducated simple ole sailor exactly what is the "climate crisis"?
Is it the "Ice Age" as predicted back in early 70's?
Is it the new "Global Warming", that so many have changed the name to feed their agenda?
Is it from some latest studies that claim a new "Ice Age" may be upon us?
Is it the decreasing Ozone layer that was going to kill us and didn't?
What about the population explosion that should have made the hippies happy that didn't occur?
What about harvesting trees that would diminish CO2 and destroy the atmosphere and humankind?
What about the Alacar scare that killed thousands of jobs that turned out to be hysteria?
What about the thalidomide scare that is now approved for use in the United States for a complication of leprosy? The drug is also used to treat multiple myeloma, a cancer that affects the bone marrow.
What about the stupid nature vs nurture theory that boys and girls were the same when born and proven incorrect later? Sheesh, you only had to be a parent to witness the differences. Oh wait, the liberals are saying that again about so-called trans-gender types.
It goes on and on. More grants, more studies, more theories that turn out to be wrong. Is there anything that some scientist, theorist, or doctorate wannabe doesn't know? Got chalk board? Let's do some equations.
Killing me!!!
.
WARNING: TONS of toxic liberal BeeEss ideology pretending to be “science”, “fairness”, “equality” and “justice” is being dumped daily unregulated into our biosphere! This putrid waste is far more damaging to the Earth than CO2, meat or even guns (combined). If this “progressive” pollution is left unchecked, it will gradually strangle and destroy the Constitution’s protective layer of freedom and prosperity!
I’ve been around the net researching AGW - those for it and against it. Each side has its paid for agenda with rebuttals being commonplace. But when I look at CO2 I find something very interesting that I haven’t seen any true rebuttal using facts and figures. It turns out CO2 has absolutely nothing to do with GW. All the talk about man made CO2 and volcanic activity are moot.
From http://greenhouse.geologist-1011.net/
If carbon dioxide produced the backradiation claimed by Arrhenius, thermal conductivity measurements of carbon dioxide would be so suppressed by the backradiation of heat conducted into this material, that the correspondingly steep temperature gradient would yield a negative thermal conductivity of carbon dioxide. In reality, a 10,000ppm increase in carbon dioxide could, at most, reduce the conductivity of air by 1%. Given the actual difference between the thermal conductivities of carbon dioxide (0.0168) and zero grade air (0.0260), a 10,000ppm increase in carbon dioxide would lower the thermal conductivity of zero grade air by 0.36%. That would represent a 0.36% increase in thermal gradient, or a surface warming of 0.18% and a ceiling cooling of 0.18% of the total difference in temperature between the top and bottom of the affected air mass. In the case of a tropospheric carbon dioxide increase of 10,000ppm, that would correspond to a warming of 0.125ºC, or one eighth of a degree Celsius at the earth’s surface, offset by a cooling of 0.125ºC at the tropopause. On the scale of doubling the troposphere’s carbon dioxide, the surface warming predicted by this simple and materialistic thermodynamic approach is on the order of 0.004ºC.
[[All the talk about man made CO2 and volcanic activity are moot.]]
It’s not really moot because IF argued CORRECTLY, it proves 2 things- 1: That there is far too little CO2 to have any effect on the climate, even IF CO2 were the driver for climate change which it isn’t, and 2: That temperatures always rise first- 800-1400 years later, then CO2 rises- proving that CO2 can not be the driver of climate change
As for the quoted article you list- I’m not sure I quite understand it- is it saying an increase in earth temp is cancelled out by a decrease in upper atmosphere temp?
"Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who grew up in a scientific household – both of his parents are mathematicians...."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.