They seem to think CO2 will stay in the atmosphere for millennia. They seem to forget how much our biosphere likes CO2. They also seem to forget that if they say the problem will be around for millennia, it’s likely the [current] set of humans view the video will shrug their shoulders and say “Eh, there’ nothing I can do about it.”.
Here’s the lead-in and discussion which has been making the rounds on Facebook. Discuss.
Imagine that aliens landed and gifted us a clean, limitless energy source. And instead of killing each other over this technology, we decided to immediately transform the world into a carbon-free society. This wonderous source would power our homes, industries, cars and planes, and humanity’s annual rate of carbon pollution would almost instantly fall to zero. So if we kicked our carbon addiction tomorrow, what would that mean for global warming?
And what about this one….
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45345518
She, openly gay, wants the heating turned up for her debate with whatsisname.
Can it get any more confused- aren’t boys=gay and girls=lesbian so, what is a gay girl?
Feminism gone even further off the rails – why do these women hate men so much yet want to be equal. Is that so that they have an excuse to hate all their sisters?
What went wrong?
And where do we guess ‘she’ stands on the subject of Global Warming Change?
sigh
The parallels with Rome are ominous…
… long supply lines to get basic stuff
…huge army
…rampant homosexuality (Hadrian, who built the wall past my (old) farm in Cumbria, wanted his lover elevated to become a God) Mr Trump’s wall????? Is that pretty woman following him around ‘just a front’? (You hate me now doncha)
…hugely bloated government bureaucracy & attendant cronies
…corruption of civic leaders by them being given free food, housing etc (they get free $$$ now)
…population kept in the dark & stupefied (alcohol in both cases, circuses then; trash TV & media now plus legalised cannabis, Prozac and Opium)
…use of slaves to grow food (Rome had Greek slaves, we now have tractors)
…ports, harbours and rivers filling with silt, often through Flash Flooding (just *how much stuff* does the Corps of Engineers move every year just to keep the Mississippi flowing where it is imagined it should flow?)
any more you’d care to add…….
No, I think that was just dim. I thought Trump was called a misogyne, now you educate he’s a gay as well. Gay bought by Putin? That’s nice, makes him a good peer to Hillary Rodham.
(You hate me now doncha) No, I pity you for such a lack of thought processes.
“(You hate me now doncha) No, I pity you for such a lack of thought processes.”
Brought on by lack of sugar.
Even Bill Clinton would disagree that “front hole” = “back hole.” In fact, I think he would say, “they are close but no cigar.”
Peta,
You asked, “Is that pretty woman following him around ‘just a front’?” No, she is a ‘participation trophy’ who used to earn money catering to the likes of her current husband, which is how she probably hooked him. However, lest we forget, such was the behavior of the wealthy and aristocracy of Europe before WWI. That was how Mata Hari survived in a difficult world.
Peta, good reply. To add to that — “Bread and Circuses” to deflect attention. Rampant in the lame-stream media, sports hero-worship, and the culture in general.
“what is a gay girl?”
One that laughs a lot?
Compare modern armies to the size most countries had 70 years ago, they are much, much smaller.
The use of slaves is no different from the use of tractors?
You do know that we aren’t laughing with you?
Among thousands of other good reasons.
Whatever person wrote that video has very little contact with reality. Or, if they do, they have contempt for their intended audience, as most of the “science” is misstated, exaggerated, and of course, totally not referenced to anywhere.
You misunderstand modern teaching techniques. It is not what is real that counts, it is what you want to be real that matters. No one should be corrected for wrong knowledge, it is their right to believe anything they want.
There are not any aliens coming now or ever, that includes any kind of messiah. So get over it.
One would think that if the aliens brought us clean energy, they would also bring us a CO2 vacuum cleaner, right?
Of course, if you asked the aliens for the CO2 vacuum, they probably take the energy generator back and put out a warning buoy that this planet is a terrifying primitive place and stay away.
“Of course, if you asked the aliens for the CO2 vacuum, they probably take the energy generator back and put out a warning buoy that this planet is a terrifying primitive place and stay away.”
That and because most of the inhabitants believe in magical sky daddies.
It really is sad how much hatred you have for your fellow men.
Aliens may believe in such things, too. Want to insult them if they show up?
We could just tell a few alien jokes and see if they have a sense of humor. If they don’t then we just insult the sh*t out of them till they leave.
Glad I read the comments before deciding whether or not to watch the video.
Quackery, quackery, quackery. I am glad I have not yet returned to watching television, and if I do get one, it will be for the sole purpose of getting the Weather Channel’s radar return if/when there is a severe storm warning, and/or the Food Channel and having a chance to run movies from my increasingly large movies library. I may start collecting some of those old 1930s-1940s B&W movies. “Key Largo” was really quite good, as was ‘The Public Enemy”.
Considering everything, including the dormant cycle the sun is experiencing now and the fact that the magnetic poles are slowly swapping ends, the ignorance that abounds in the CAGWers’ part of the “climate spectrum” is appalling. They aren’t doing Real Science. They are trying to create a new religious order. While I wish sincerely that they might find themselves stranded on ice floes with no way to summon help, I also know that it is VERY necessary to know what they are up to and be as aware of it as possible.
Only when you know what the opposition is up to, and how utterly foolish it is, can you stop it. And these people are as public about what they want as you can get.
>and if I do get one, it will be for the sole purpose of getting the Weather Channel’s radar return if/when there is a severe storm warning
Don’t bother- you can find Doppler radar composites that show the radar pretty much world-wide now; so you can watch what you want without all that annoying commentary.
Although I admit its always fun to watch where they send Jim Cantore…
Quick note, Sara:
Since you obviously have some type of internet or wi-fi, you can use (www) (dot) weather (dot) gov; type in your zip code (or any other identifier), and scroll down the screen. On the right side, you eventually come to a screen w/ your current radar presentation; click on it, and you can zoom in, and then choose to animate, or have it remain stationary.
I haven’t watched the Wx Channel in about four years now. Once their forecasts became worthless, I sought alternatives, and now the NWS site is a permanent bookmark for me. I can get weather updates and current radar, any time I choose.
Hope that helps,
Best Regards,
Vlad
Thank you, gentlemen. I do get the Doppler return on my desktop, but in my kitchen, I did have a small screen TV for those days when the weather was dicey and I was not at my desk. When that died, along with the bigger TV, I just let it go for the time being. There is so little worth looking at on TV now, anyway, that unless it’s fantasy stuff like Game of Thrones – something like that – it’s almost not worth the bother or the expense.
Even this vid admits that temps have only risen 0.8-degrees C since the start of the industrial revolution, (02:12). 0.8 C? That’s ALL??? That’s NOTHING. That’s not runaway-global-warming, its very gentle warming since the early 1800s, well within the context of climate stability!
“Even if we cut all CO2 tomorrow we’re guaranteed some amount of climate change and warmer temperatures.”
PBS believes that there would be NO climate change if all CO2 emissions were eliminated tomorrow. They why did the Medieval Warming send world temps higher than today? Did the Vikings engage in lots of industry that emitted vast amounts of CO2 to warm up the world?
They believe that CO2 CAUSES warming, but that’s just fashionable thinking as there is no scientific evidence to back this up. Not only does rising CO2 not cause GW warmng is not even correlated with rising tempratures. After all, there was a serious spate of cooling from at least 1940 to 1975 while CO2 rose steadily. And to have causation there must be correlation.
“Each degree of additional warming IS ALSO THOUGHT TO reduce crop yields BY AS MUCH AS 10%” (4:13)
Watch those phrases that admit doubts on the part of the claimant. “…is also thought…”? Ok, but WHO thinks that way? Is that morsel of dreamlike thought quantified by research that was published and something we can actually read? Probably not. It ‘s probably some clown in an NGO who thinks that it may be so, and does so for advancing a political agenda. And then there’s that well-used phrase “as much as”. That’s a phrase that allows anyone to truthfully make any claim, no matter how absurd. Truth is that I COULD make AS MUCH AS ten million dollars a year. It’s true. But I instead make a trifling amount. But I MIGHT make as much as that, some day, hopefully, maybe, could be.
Anyway, if each degree of GW reduces crop yields as much as 10% then why oh why do farmers grow crops in hothouses? Don’t they know that 7 degrees more heat that is captured by their hothouses COULD reduce their yields by AS MUCH AS SEVENTY PERCENT? Why doesn’t someone tell them that they’re doing it all wrong???? /sarc
I don’t think so. They believe the residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere is ~ 100 years (as IPCC say). Alarmists once claimed CO2 residence time of 1000 years! So they think warming will continue. They are wrong on CO2 residence time. It is somewhere between 5 and 10 years.
Everything said against CO2 is exaggeration according to the tried and tested alarmist formula:
1) Make a scary number up.
2) Write a model or some warped statistics to show it’s ‘science’.
3) Get it published in the academic literature with nice pal reviews.
4) It’s now official science.
Of course that is not how it actually ‘works’. It just looks that way.
Alarmists already believe their scary number. Because the world is Capitalist, they think everything, even the scientific literature is corrupted by a Capitalist worldview. So getting their studies published is just evening the score a little for a post-normal, or liberatory, science. The other side (Capitalists) play dirty. So must we!
1) They begin by suspecting their alarmist number because one must begin by looking at the worst possible scenario;
2) Next they find some sciency way to explain it to themselves: a mathematical model, bend statistics, or cherry-picked data.
3) Then they write their hypothesis in more scientific language and get it peer reviewed.
4) Then it’s official science.
You don’t need the sarc tag. It is mostly spot on.
It was thinking of adding TM tag for:
4) Then it’s The Science™
Who funded this crap?
They are on some kind of drug… See below.
Peril and Promise: The Challenge of Climate Change is produced by WNET 13, NYC.
Lead funding for Peril and Promise is provided by Dr. P. Roy Vagelos and Diana T. Vagelos. Major support is provided by The Marc Haas Foundation and Sue and Edgar Wachenheim III
From the Wiki puff piece:
Pindaros Roy Vagelos (born October 8, 1929 in Westfield, New Jersey), better known as P. Roy Vagelos or Roy Vagelos, is an American physician and business executive, who was president and chief executive officer (1985) and chairman (1986) of the American pharmaceutical company Merck & Co. (known as MSD outside the U.S.). He attracted research scientists who developed many major new drugs.
Since 1995, Vagelos serves as Chairman of the Board of Regeneron pharmaceuticals.
He is also the Chairman of the Prix Galien USA awards committee and a prior recipient of the Pro Bono Humanum Award.
In addition to his business accomplishments, Vagelos is the author of more than 100 scientific papers.[1] He is also on the Board of Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania and has funded three of the university’s most elite undergraduate programs: The Vagelos Scholars Program in Molecular Life Sciences (MLS), The Vagelos Program in Life Sciences and Management (LSM) and The Vagelos Integrated Program in Energy Research (VIPER).
Hmmmm . . . something about ” a fool and his money . . .”
It is hard to believe so much could be so wrong with such authority.
If you think the video is depressing, don’t read the comments…… which is what I did instead of watching the video. The mind-blower was something like “What if there was a plant or a filter that could capture the CO2 and re-purpose it into something useful?
GAAAAAA!
I have no need for a Youtube or Google signon, but someone needs to reply that there is a plant that does this – and it’s called “a plant”.
Likely the comment will just be removed. I’ll give it a run.
I put several replies. So far, all are still there as far as I can tell. However, one of my replies is hidden while the believer’s reply is not (I’m sandwiched between the two comments and hidden). I don’t have time to check further currently, but ill try to check back later and report.
The arrogance of these idiots who keep making predictions with no basis . . . and zero accountability . . . is amazing. How many predictions need to turn out to be false before people stop believing them?
Any attempt to refute even the most blatant lie is labeled denierism. So they’ll stop believing themselves. So long as Joe doesn’t have to debate anyone his audience won’t hear a counter view. That’s their idea anyhow.
The writer is a journalist, the narrator is a bio chemist. I thought climate scientists were the only people we should believe.
Looks like a piece of polished propaganda.
Why do we need aliens? Every time a warmunist opens his mouth he demands we convert our energy systems to “clean renewable sources like wind and solar ®”. So I’m thinking it must already exist.
The cleanest, most scalable, relatively limitless energy source is called nuclear power. We’ve had it for 70 years. People like Joe have been opposing it all their life.
When you say “cleanest” do you mean like Chernobyl and Fukushima?
Both designed 60 years ago. He is speaking about modern designs.
Even with older western designs, he’s still correct.
You really do like to display your ignorance, don’t you.
Even with Chernobyl and Fukushima, nuclear is by several orders of magnitude the cleanest and safest form of energy around.
Chernobyl was a design rejected by the west because of it’s instability. It was chosen by the Soviets because it was cheap. Even so the accident only happened because most of the safeties were disabled so they could run a test to see how close they could get the reactor to the point of instability without losing control. They got too close.
Finally, had they spent a few million on a containment vessel, also standard in the west, there would never have been a problem. The debris would be inside the containment vessel, sealed away from the rest of the world.
With the exception of a few hot spots, most of the evacuated areas around Chernobyl could be re-occupied today.
Fukushima was once again an older reactor that was already scheduled for deactivation. With it, had the back up generator been kept in a water tight room, there would never have been a problem.
Regardless, the amount of radiation that leaked was small. The evacuation was caused by panicked politicians, not by any health needs. The area is clean enough that most of it could be reinhabited today.
LOL, tell me Mr. MarkW, when will the first Chinese designed reactor fail?
You really do love diving into irrelevancies, don’t you.
Are you finally admitting that you have nothing intelligent to add to the conversation?
Yes, I’ll dive into the irrelevancy of your comment.
…
I’ve seen a lot of your posts here, and as far as I can tell, you’ve added noting intelligent to any conversation. As far as everyone can tell, you don’t even know how to post a link.
[No. MarkW has over 1160 comments, and has posted
manyover one hundred different links in different comments. .mod]“Cleanest” only if you don’t concern yourself with the nuclear waste produced by modern nuclear reactors.
“Of particular concern in nuclear waste management are two long-lived fission products, Tc-99 (half-life 220,000 years) and I-129 (half-life 15.7 million years), which dominate spent fuel radioactivity after a few thousand years.” — source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_waste
“… we decided to immediately transform the world into a carbon-free society.” — an impossible scenario!
We would still produce cement, have methane and CO2 coming out of our landfills, produce CO2 from decaying or cremated human bodies, and the myriad underground coal fires that we don’t know how to extinguish.
For a refresher: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/05/05/anthropogenic-global-warming-and-its-causes/
In addition to that all seven and a half billion people would need to stop breathing.
World population in 1850–about 1.3 billion
a six fold increase in exhalation since then is a lot of additional CO2
jvcstone, almost three years ago I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation of the quantity of CO2 generated by exhalations from the respiration of all humans on Earth versus the quantity of CO2 then being attributed to the burning of fossil fuels. The ratio was 4.2%, with a likely error band of +/- 50%.
Did I hear Climate Expert Joe state that CO2 is responsible for 80% of the modern warming? An increase from 0.03% to 0.04% of our atmosphere has resulted in an increase of global temp of 0.8degC is really quite amazing… But more interesting is that this presentation seems like a perfect segue towards a push for CO2 sequestration, the Magic Pill that will suck the money right out of our pockets. Of course, without the negative effects of what almost always happens with geoengineering ..
This is just more alarmist propaganda. At least I’ll agree with him about reducing pollution, just that the pollutant isn’t CO2.
“Imagine that aliens landed and gifted us a clean, limitless energy source.”
And they buried it to keep it safe. And all we have to do is dig it up and burn it.
What if the Carbonistas just vanished, poof, into thin air tomorrow? What would happen?
Perhaps a song would help:
Imagine no Carbonistas
It’s easy if you try
No more Carbon taxes
No Carbon Lies
What is really scary is this is the kind of crap that is being taught in schools.
This alien clean energy source?
Given to us “to serve man.”
…. “It’s a cook book!!!”
As evidenced by this PBS video, the Warmunists have already discovered an endless supply of “clean” energy – Stupidium. We just need to learn how to harness it.
Apparently the new statement about “global warming is real” goes under ALL global warming videos, not just skeptical ones. I get the message on this video and most of those on the HotMess channel. I tried some other “believer” videos and they had the message too.
Surprising how a breathing, carbon-based life-form can decry the evils of a molecule comprised of one atom of carbon and two atoms of oxygen.
should not have read this first thing in the morning. I read Climate Psychology Handbook: Promote Renewables to Cure Debilitating Climate Angst, a day or so ago. Something about placing a bike helmet on your desk to show that you bike to work…….
I am definitely filled with angst…. think I spend the day looking at hummers to relieve mine.
Why do they hum? Don’t they know the words?
ASTOUNDING …… How bad and misinformed the PBS groupthink Green Blob are ??? …….. Just take one part of this film which showed a third world kitchen and talked about air pollution from cooking killing many …….. Well a good solution would be to have a few cheap, well constructed COAL powered power stations to supply a thing called ELECTRICITY …….. any chance this may save some of the poor from lung problems ……. I think so.
AND WHEN HAS Co2 ever been a pollutant ……. ???
Our problem is the Supreme Court and previous administrations allowed the EPA to declare CO2 a pollutant they can regulate.
At least the “Indiana Pi Bill” never actually became law in 1897 due to the timely intervention of a University Professor. Not a few of today’s academics actually supported the legal demonization of carbon dioxide. Alas, human progress (and progressives) are not always oriented in a forward direction. We should not be entirely surprised at this result because the discipline of chemistry has itself been demonized by popular culture and hand wringing public broadcasters for many decades. In the environmental movement it occupies a level similar to that of slaughterhouses: people like the products but also appear to think that you can have one without the functions of the other.
The “Reefer Madness” of Climate Change
Joe is talking to you as if you are a child which is his target audience. So teach your children well.