Who is Scared of Warmth and Moisture?

By Viv Forbes

A scheming cabal of green bureaucrats, academics and corporate speculators is trying to scare us into a mess of energy taxes, subsidies and rationing in order to combat what they call “catastrophic man-made global warming”.

Climate alarmists speculate that if the level of harmless carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is doubled (which may or may not happen in a century or so), world temperature may be one or two degrees warmer than it would have otherwise been.

The proposition that this mild warming, if it occurs, would be “catastrophic” is so laughable that they had to invent “positive feedbacks” to multiply this scare to maybe six degrees in a century. However the emerging evidence, and Earth’s past history, show that feedbacks are negative – the vast oceans tend to stabilise warming temperatures so that even the two degree forecast is probably excessive.

In many places in Australia, temperature rises about sixteen degrees from dawn to mid-afternoon – over say eight hours, or two degrees per hour. So people who can cope with a daily warming of 16 degrees over 8 hours are supposed to panic about a fudged forecast of two degrees over a century – about the warming we feel in just one hour every morning. Even less “frightening” is the less than one degree of warming that has occurred over the last 200 years.

Why worry about warming anyhow?

The world has never suffered “runaway global warming” even when carbon dioxide levels were far above those of today. But it does suffer regular ice ages. It is not warmth that causes hardship and mass extinctions – it is the deathly grip of ice. The Little Ice Age that ended just 150 years ago was a time of failed crops, abandoned farms, advancing glaciers and famines. Even in modern times, there are more deaths caused by winter cold snaps than by summer heat waves. And those people free to move (tourists and retirees) always flock to warm places like Florida, Bali and the Riviera, not to frigid climes like Siberia, Alaska or Antarctica.

Moreover, more warmth always causes extra evaporation from lakes and oceans. What goes up, must form clouds and come down somewhere as extra precipitation. And if there is more carbon dioxide and water in the atmosphere, plants will grow better. Why do we need carbon taxes and ration cards to protect us from a warm moist climate with more luxuriant plant life?

The whole climate scam is just a smoke screen to hide the UN inspired grab for more taxes and more power.

Viv Forbes,

Rosewood Qld Australia

forbes@carbon-sense.com

I am happy for my email address to be published.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
R. Shearer

Warmth and moisture are two of my favorites things.

pat

Politicians seem particularly gullible. As if they are genetically defective.

I think it is more than that. The extraterritorial, hard to disprove, environmental issue gives an excuse to push systems thinking/systems dynamics that are thinly masked political theories as climate modelling and in the classroom. It is no accident to read that it is not enough to use systems modelling in the hard science classes. Systems thinking/modelling must be treated as a social science. That means it is control over people and their behavior and their economic decisions that are the real target.
Following up on a classroom lead took me to the 2005 European Conference of System Science which announced that we in the West are moving away from the science of the Enlightenment to the Chinese view that is best described as experience science. And that experience science pushes the unity of the natural and human sciences. That’s the sort of views Uncle Karl and Uncle Vladimir had and it is the antithesis of human freedom to be deemed by your government and its National Academy of Sciences to be a socio-technical sub-system of the broader ecosystem. So much of this AGW modelling like socio-cultural and systems thinking/systems dynamics in K-12 education is not science or pedagogy in any sense we have historically recognized as valid.
http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/who-granted-permission-to-spearhead-societal-evolution-to-a-global-cooperative-consciousness/ and Bela Banathy’s Nine Dimensions shows you there really is no domain of life being left out. They want to redesign and control it all. Even though most of what is targeted was never intentionally designed in the first place. It evolved and only survived if it worked even if no one knew why exactly.
And the UN is pushing this as part of the implementation of the DeLors report from the mid-90s so this is international.

wayne

Any possible warming is primarily in nighttime temperatures anyway, so who really cares? Really. I’ve always wished for more tolerate frigid nights most of the year, more like five or ten degrees further south, those nights would be fantastic! More moisture? That wouldn’t hurt either.

Guess those of us living in the north of Australia (in my case Townsville) and enjoy 24c minimums too 36 to 38C maximums day with upwards of 90%rh on a constant basis for 4 months at a time are just freaks then.

Ben D

Who wouldn’t be scared, the warmth is even making the fish shrink,,,,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19758440

Alan

heck, between tonight and tomorrow afternoon, we are supposed to see an 18 degree celsius difference in Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada. We think it is a good thing, it means one more day with out snow.

Neville.

The important point to remember is there is nothing the OECD can do about reducing co2 emissions.
http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=90&pid=44&aid=8&cid=CG6,CG5,&syid=1990&eyid=2010&unit=MMTCD
Just to remind everyone of a few pesky facts—- in 1990 the total human emission of co2 p.a was 21.6 bn tonnes, 11.6 from OECD and 10 from non OECD
The latest numbers for 2010 are 31.8 bn tonnes p.a , 18.8 bn tonnes for non OECD and 13 bn tonnes for OECD.
At the end of 2012 the non OECD alone probably will equal total world emissions of just 22 years ago in 1990.
Of course China, India etc have another billion and a half people to be lifted out of poverty, so there is zero we can do to stop the increase in co2 emissions at all.
This is very simple Kindy maths that a competent 5 year old can understand, so why have we got such stupid donkeys running our countries?

“The whole climate scam is just a smoke screen to hide the UN inspired grab for more taxes and more power.”
Viv Forbes,
Rosewood Qld Australia
Yes, and world domination ultimately, Viv. We won’t let it happen.

AndyG55

Bring on 600ppm+, I say.
Warmth (if CO2 had any effect on temps, which is a nonsense anyway) and CO2,
The Earth shall flourish and be abundant.

Ted G

Well done Vic, you are a great fighter against the crooks and huckster who are trying to push the criminal climate scare.

LamontT

Well in the Chico, Ca, USA area right now We can see lows in the morning of 60 – 61 and highs in the upper 90’s. That gives a swing of 30 – 40 degrees in a single day. Which is one of the many reasons I’ve never bought into the catastrophic angle.
That and no one can tell me what the normal temperature of the earth is. I mean if we are warming off of a normal we must know what that normal is right? Oh wait we don’t need to know it since the catastrophic consequences will be so evil.

Karen D

Great summary of the situation. Plain as day and most of us know it!

LazyTeenager

So people who can cope with a daily warming of 16 degrees over 8 hours are supposed to panic about a fudged forecast of two degrees over a century –
——-
Sure, but the same amount of fall in average temperatures would bring on the ice age. Saying a rise of that amount has no effect is not physically consistent.

Bravo Viv Forbes! Spot on! You have set out the key to unraveling the whole huge UN sponsored fraud. I wonder if any of our mentally defective leaders will read and understand?

LazyTeenager

Moreover, more warmth always causes extra evaporation from lakes and oceans. What goes up, must form clouds and come down somewhere as extra precipitation.
———
Sure, but where does it come down? The Australian economy has just recovered from a series of massive floods in one year. The floods took 2% off the GDP.

Gary Hladik

Neville. says (September 30, 2012 at 3:44 pm): “This is very simple Kindy maths that a competent 5 year old can understand, so why have we got such stupid donkeys running our countries?”
Because so many “stupid donkeys” vote for them?

Manfred

The celebration of hope, climate rationalism and traditional science so evident on this site is the breathe of life, the light of freedom and (anecdotal) the most effective anti-depressant I have experienced. The controlling catastrophists are cultivating a double dose of depression for themselves. Not only will they bear witness to their expensive and arrogant failure to control the climate, they will suffer the existential failure of their ‘control’ delusion. For many, perhaps this could be their ‘On the road to Damascus’ moment. For others, they will merely redouble their efforts to control the uncontrollable, their focus shifting elsewhere.
One problem is that being pushed inexorably back from a position of extreme Ideology, the rest of us breathe a sigh of relief as a less extreme position is adopted. The extreme position of CAGW is morphing into politically correct ‘human induced climate change’, which unfortunately includes all aspects of climate and all aspects of human activity. Given the proclivity of post-normal science to embrace an evidence free precautionary principle, the recipe for political intervention by the Ministry-of-We-Know-Best remains as motivated as ever.
“Spurn this,” as one comedian once said, “as you would a rabid dog.”

Neville-never forget the OECD itself has said that everything they push is part of their Green Growth agenda.
It’s just the premise for a power grab via stealth.
Ooops on that latter goal.

LazyTeenager

The whole climate scam is just a smoke screen to hide the UN inspired grab for more taxes and more power.
————-
Utter BS. The trend under all governments, both left and right, over the last 25 years has been reduced taxes.

Caleb

What will likely happen is that the new schemes will be such utter failures that there will be a backlash. For example, when we start to read headlines such as, “Greek Electrical System Faces Collapse,” then we know people are starting to rethink. The warm-and-fuzzy sounding ideas have not resulted in a warm-and-fuzzy reality, but rather a cold-and-thorny one.
The word for this backlash, if you are a true leftist, is “counter-revolution.” Rather than seeing ideas were stupid to start with, and facing failure, the blame is laid on “counter-revolutionary elements.” Then, if you retain the political clout, those “counter-revolutionary elements” must be “purged.” They are the scape-goats who get the blame for your own failure.
All this does is prolong the failure. Prolong the human misery. Prolong the ignorance.
The alternative is to vote the bums out.

D Böehm

I guess Lazy hasn’t noticed that the new Socialist French president is raising income tax rates to 75%.
Three for the government, one for me… three for the government, one for me…

As long as the ”Skeptics” confuse big / small climatic changes with the phony GLOBAL warmings – they are guilty as hell… the honest public cops the bill. More H2O +CO2 in the air = milder climate, not global warming!!! Milder climate is: cooler days / warmer nights. Clear sky = hotter days / colder nights: http://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com/2012/07/20/water-vapor/

Kent Draper

Utter BS……. from Lazy Teenager….
I was tempted to comment until I realized that you probably ARE a lazy teenager and haven’t yet had some life experiences that mature most people. Come back after you have lived some and then report, for now, adults are trying to have a conversation…. :)…..

Neville.

So tell us lazy teenager, how would you reduce co2 emissions? See my post above and I hope you understand simple kindy maths.

Jimbo

Viv, Viv, Viv darling. You just don’t understand cup cakes. It’s about selling an idea (ideology). This is what it’s all about. Ignore suicidal greenhouse growers pumping in 1,000 ppm into their cherished greenhouses and crops. Ignore excess winter deaths in the UK. Ignore the Roman Warm Period when empires flourished. Ignore the opportunist Eric the Red in Greenland. Once you have learned to ignore (dare I say deny???) these things then the science is settled and we can carry on establishing the new Harold Camingesque religion. It’s all about that rapture moment.

Curiousgeorge

@ pat says:
September 30, 2012 at 3:20 pm
Politicians seem particularly gullible. As if they are genetically defective.
***********************************************
“As if” ? That’s a good one. LOL.

Frank Kotler

That was a low blow, Viv, bringing in Bali. You KNOW they like to party in Bali! 50,000 of ’em (do I remember that right? seems impossible) – by jet plane. If there were any who arrived by sailboat, I don’t recall hearing of it. Do you suppose, just maybe, that they don’t believe the stories they’re tellin’?

Curiousgeorge

Y’all should brush up on your Thomas Hobbes. “Bellum omnium contra omnes”. And the only way to prevent such is to surrender your liberty for peace.

AndyG55

@Lazy
“Sure, but where does it come down? The Australian economy has just recovered from a series of massive floods in one year. The floods took 2% off the GDP.:
Gees you need to do some research before you spout off. These storms/floods occur pretty regularly (on approximately a 40 year cycle in Australia (do some research on floods in Qld., last major one was 1974 iirc, and was very similar in size.) They are NOTHING UNUSUAL !!!
That is the Australian climate, that’s what it does……
periods of drought, with deluges for a couple of years at the end of each period…..
and NOTHING has happened to change that climate.

Edohiguma

Another thing Lazy seems to forget that taxes in the “rich” EU countries are already criminally high. In the meantime governments like in Germany have introduced a lot of additional taxes (the price for coffee, for example, in Germany is more than 50% taxes, same for gasoline in both Germany and Austria.) Plus at the same time they also kept increasing the overall spending. Where do you think our national debts come from?
In Austria the government has the highest tax income in history and our national debt still went from 70% of the GDP in 2010 to 80% in 2011. The Germans have crossed the 2 trillion Euro line already and they keep going up. Heck, in the past 40 years Germany had an even budget (income = expenses) once. The other 39 years always saw higher spending and a growing debt, despite insanely high taxes.
And yes, France is hitting the 75%. With that they’ll kill their economy. Everyone who can afford it with shovel his money out of the country. Companies that can afford it will leave France and the companies that can’t, well, they will do what Spain’s “green” energy has done: go belly up, which will then prompt the EU to get involved, led by “brave” neo-fascist His Royal Highness the Grand Commissar of the EUSSR José Manuel Barroso. Which means, we can get ready to bail out France.

steve

@lazy teenager
“The trend under all governments, both left and right, over the last 25 years has been reduced taxes.”
not true in the UK. as a % of national income, government spending (taxes) has risen under both right and left.
“Sure, but the same amount of fall in average temperatures would bring on the ice age. Saying a rise of that amount has no effect is not physically consistent.”
that’s true enough. both sides of the argument should stop conflating short and long term trends.

Lazy Teenager,
Perhaps if you weren’t so “lazy” you might realize that the floods in Qld are a regular event, virtually identical to those in 1973 as but one example going back to the 1800’s. Also of note is that these floods were made markedly worse by CAGW alarmism, which caused dams meant for flood mitigation to be held at levels above the point where they could do anything more than release water more rapidly to further exacerbate the problem.
You also ignore the fact that cyclone frequency below the Tropic of Capricorn has actually reduced markedly from the 1970’s onwards, in total contrast to CAGW theory. Australia is and has always been a “sunburnt country”, a land of “droughts and flooding rains”, has been so since the First Fleet in 1788, who nearly perished due to a decade long drought shortly after they arrived which made farming land untillable even on an alluvial plain along the coastal strip in the most moderate climate our continent has to offer.
So by all means ignore history, after all it is the only way you can make baseless assertions and draw conclusions which would otherwise be unjustified.

Eugene WR Gallun

i e-mailed this to Viv.
YES! The whole course of government in the last fifty years has been
to grab more taxes and power over the people. A simple examination of
budget sizes and the growth in the sheer number of laws and regulations
makes that a no-brainer.
In the past taxes and laws and regulations have been piled on us with the
intention of doing “good” for the country. The advocates for such were
misguided fools but not malicious.
That is not the case with global warming. The people who advocate this
have no good intentions for America. They advocate global warming
because they know the taxes and laws and regulation they want to
implement to fight global warming will destroy this country.
So we are no longer fighting fools — we are fighting people who hate this
country and wish to see it destroyed. Global warming is their weapon.
My opinion about this was formed by attending a number of “green rallies”
and listening to the hate for America that was constantly bubbling up in
the crowd and among the speakers. You hear it from their own mouths.
Eugene WR Gallun

Steve D

‘The world has never suffered “runaway global warming” even when carbon dioxide levels were far above those of today.’
And that is a very good point. Why is that I wonder?

Neville.

Poor old Lazy, suddenly finds questions he can’t answer. Here’s a hint lazy old mate, USA emissions are heading back to 1990 levels but non OECD emissions are soaring.
Get on the next flight to China, India etc and demonstrate your concern, I’m sure they’ll be sympathetic to your cause and treat you with kid gloves. NOT.
But take heart Lazy you will wake up to yourself one day, let’s just hope that it’s sooner rather than later.

Tim Walker

LazyTeenager says:
September 30, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Moreover, more warmth always causes extra evaporation from lakes and oceans. What goes up, must form clouds and come down somewhere as extra precipitation.
———
Sure, but where does it come down? The Australian economy has just recovered from a series of massive floods in one year. The floods took 2% off the GDP.
Much earlier a Robert W and Rob Honeycutt said the following:
“Badgersouth and I were just discussing the potential of setting up a coordinated “Crusher Crew” where we could pull our collective time and knowledge together in order to pounce on overly vocal deniers on various comments sections of blogs and news articles.” – Rob Honeycutt [Skeptical Science], February 11, 2011
“May I suggest first on our list as being the *#1 Science Blog* “Watts up with that”? They get a few people come there to engage from time to time but rarely a coordinated effort.” – Robert W. [Skeptical Science], February 11, 2011
So Lazy Teenager are you one of the Crusher Crew trolls? It looks like others pointed out your errors. Seems like everytime I see you post it is the same lack of intelictual integrity on your part or just a lack of knowledge. Too bad you don’t seem to learn the truth.

Tim Walker

The last four of my comments have failed to post. What is going on?
[Reply: Found one in the spam folder and posted it. Don’t know about the others. — mod.]

D Böehm

Eugene WR Gallun,
Yes, the Left is driven by hatred. It is the one motivation shared by all of them. They blame others for their personal failings, when the fault is almost always theirs alone.
People with a sense of fulfillment think the world is good, while the frustrated blame the world for their failure.
~ Eric Hoffer

They are each individually frustrated losers. But together they are a serious threat.

Neville. says:”So tell us lazy teenager, how would you reduce co2 emissions? ”
Neville, you should answer: why reducing CO2?! If you have been brainwashed that: 150y ago was the best amount of CO2 for the trees and crops – it doesn’t mean that; the trees / crops should be denied extra CO2 that they desperately need. Blaming CO2 & water vapor – but calling themselves green, is the biggest stupidity. Not, how to reduce CO2, BUT WHY?! Stop using Hansen’s brains, start using your own. Carbon molesters like you, don’t know that: their bodies are 23-25% made from carbon. 2] if you burn a 5 ton tree. – only 0,5kg ash left, all the rest H2O +CO2 gone in smoke. Same goes for the food you eat. reducing CO2 would be a crime!…

MarkW

LazyTeenager says:
September 30, 2012 at 4:24 pm

What’s with the strawmen?
Nobody said it would have no effect. What they said is that it wouldn’t do any harm.

Hoser

Another really stupid idea:
http://www.space.com/17830-asteroid-dust-geoenineering-global-warming.html
Some idiot in an ivory tower wants to explode an asteroid to create a dust cloud that will ‘shade’ the Earth. As if they know what they are doing.

Who still believes that anthorpogenic global warming garbage? The cure is worse than the ‘disease’. Sure, let’s wreck economies, and allow a few government officials make decisions for us regarding what cars we can drive, what food we can eat, when we can turn on light bulbs, and what kind of light bulbs we can own. They also get to decide whether we’ll be treated for a disease or just given pain medication while we die.
Yes, we have been warming since the Little Ice Age (ending ~1750), and Dalton minimum (~1815). The issue is whether the warming is natural. The side issue is whether CO2 has anything to do with causing the rise. The real science (as opposed to the government-funded hogwash intended to support policies requiring more government control and central planning) indicates warmer periods a few centuries and millenia ago occurred naturally. Atmospheric CO2 concentratin change is an effect of warming and cooling, not a cause. We are able to feed more people with higher CO2 concentrations because crops are more productive. More people die of cold than from heat.
Meanwhile, government imposed green poverty will force devloped nations to adopt third-world living conditions. Power will be unreliable. If refrigeration is unreliable, food will spoil. Disease will increase. Unemployment will be much higher, and available work will be more manual labor. Middle class? What middle class? Yes, the cure is far, far worse than the disease. Why do they do it? Well, the powerful will get everything (they think) and lord over the masses. The flaw in their logic is they won’t be able to maintain civilization – it will collapse. Only a highly educated free middle class can support modern technology.
The answer is high per-capita energy consumption and providing abundant reliable and inexpensive power that can last for centuries. We have that technology available – thorium burned in modular integral fast reactors. Little waste produced. Inexpensive to build. 1000x safer than current generation reactors. If we build liquid core reactors, they can’t “melt” down, since they are already liquid. They self-regulate, and safety is simple: pull the plug, they go sub-critical and cool to a solid in air. Restarting is easy – heat, liquefy, and pump back to the core.
The choice is simple: a phony Little House on the Prairie, or a real Star Trek future.

Another alias.

MarkW

LazyTeenager says:
September 30, 2012 at 4:27 pm
The whole climate scam is just a smoke screen to hide the UN inspired grab for more taxes and more power.
————-
Utter BS. The trend under all governments, both left and right, over the last 25 years has been reduced taxes.
—-
For some strange reason, you seem to believe that your point is not only responsive to the intial claim, but actually refutes it.
Of course you are also confusing tax rates with taxes. Liberals often confuse the two, usually on purpose.

Eugene WR Gallun

A BUDGET DEFICIT IS REALLY A “DELAYED TAX”.
By the way — a budget deficit is really a “delayed tax”. The taxpayer has to pay for it sometime. If you really want to figure out the true tax burden placed on the people year by year you need to add together the collected taxes and the budget deficit.
By that correct standard under Obama our taxes have risen faster and higher than at any time in the past.
Eugene WR Gallun

Tom Curtis

“A scheming cabal of green bureaucrats, academics and corporate speculators is trying to scare us into a mess of energy taxes, subsidies and rationing in order to combat what they call “catastrophic man-made global warming”.”
Are you all so certain there is no connection between rejection of the science of global warming, and a fondness for conspiracy theories? Given the vehemence of your response to Lewandowsky et al, 2012, you sure seem fond of posting conspiracy theories.

MarkW

Tom Curtis says:
September 30, 2012 at 6:06 pm

Since when is reality, a conspiracy theory?

D Böehm

Tom Curtis,
Every word in the statement you quoted is factual.
Now I will explain to you why the “carbon” scare is a false alarm:
We will begin with a LONG time period; about three and a half centuries. Let’s look at the trend:
http://i35.tinypic.com/2db1d89.jpg
As we see, the long term trend is the same, whether CO2 is low or high. That is verified in this Wood For Trees chart. The naturally rising global temperature since the LIA has remained within its long term parameters. There is no acceleration in global warming; it is on the same trend line that it was on before the start of the industrial revolution, thus falsifying the CO2=CAGW conjecture. (CAGW = ‘catastrophic anthropogenic global warming’.)
The scientific fact that CO2 has no measurable effect on global temperature is confirmed here. Notice that the two warming episodes — again, one when CO2 was low, and the other when CO2 was high — shows conclusively that any effect from CO2 is so minuscule that it is not even measurable, since the rising temperature trends are exactly the same.
Empirical measurements also show conclusively that CO2 follows temperature on all time scales, from decades to hundreds of millennia. That proves that the alarmist crowd has cause and effect reversed. Temperature changes cause CO2 changes, not vice-versa. There is no empirical, testable scientific evidence showing that rising CO2 causes rising temperatures. That false belief is based on an entirely coincidental and short-term correlation, which is now breaking down. There has been no global warming for 15 years, while CO2 has risen steadily.
Finally, the planet is starved of harmless, beneficial CO2. More is better. With added CO2 the biosphere will thrive, and there will be no global harm or damage. The “carbon” scare is a false alarm.
Using verifiable scientific facts, it is demonstrated above that CO2 has no measurable effect on temperature. None. The reason that the alarmist contingent cannot get anything right is because they are fixated on the false and disproven presumption that CO2 drives temperature — when, in fact, exactly the opposite is true.

Jimbo says: ” Ignore the Roman Warm Period when empires flourished. Ignore the opportunist Eric the Red in Greenland”
Jimbo, your heart in on the correct place. but your head is in outdated paganist cloud. Roman period was ”MILDER” climate around Mediterranean – wasn’t GLOBAL warming! You want details:
http://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com/2012/08/25/skeptics-stinky-skeletons-from-their-closet/
The ”Skeptics” will never win against Warmist lies; by telling bigger lies of their own. please, read that post, if you want the Warmist to take you seriously. Ian Plimer’s lies (which you are parroting) are giving oxygen to the Warmist. Cheers!

Eugene WR Gallun says September 30, 2012 at 6:06 pm
A BUDGET DEFICIT IS REALLY A “DELAYED TAX”.

Yes, but we can ‘inflate away’ that owed debt don’t you know * …
/partial sarc
.
(* Your cue to list who that hurts financially, how that affects savings, bond yields, etc.)
.

Eugene WR Gallun

Hoser says
sept 30 6:04pm
GREEN POVERTY
Wow, man! You nailed it. BUMPER STICKER!
Eugene WR Gallun