The Heartland Institute’s Donald Kendal, Jim Lakely, and Chris Talgo present episode 365 of the In The Tank Podcast. Stories have popped up recently that might point to the climate cult falling apart. From Al Gore calling out corporations for “greenwashing” to Rashida Tlaib lashing out at bankers for not cutting off fossil fuel financing, it seems like the “greenies” are turning on each other. Also, YouTube denied Heartland’s attempt at monetizing our channel, claiming our content is “harmful.”
“…The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie….” Time has run out.
Unfortunately your friend’s mom has scooped up all the gold returns on that website so any hopefuls need to get a real job now.
You can’t continue using grammar school averaging for 50 years without questions being asked sooner or later. This period of time is sufficient for climate scientists to have started using some calculus to obtain better answers to how the climate and temperature works. Simply assuming a flat disk for the earth and an average insolation over the whole disk is beyond childish.
Has anyone seen calculation on how much “back radiation” is absorbed on its way back down? It’s not only “up going” radiation that contributes to saturation, back radiation must also contribute. Have we reached that point yet?
“Simply assuming a flat disk for the earth and an average insolation over the whole disk is beyond childish.”
Over 50 years, that is close enough. Over the short timeframe Milankovitch cycles (100k-400k years), or rather over a Galactic Year (246 million years) or even an Orion turn-over timeframe (anyones guess), perhaps we are talking variability in insolation in the 8+ percent range.
Meaning longterm we are varying from Icehouse Earth to Hothouse Earth.
Over the whole disc, the insolation is pretty close to uniform per square meter of that disc as seen from the sun. As a sphere, it is not (uniform) per square meter.
At the very north of the north pole, one square meter on the disc, when projected to an angle infinitely close to paralell with the incoming sunrays, makes for a whole darn lot of square meters on the ground.
You can calculate for yourself how many (square) meters a 1 degree angle for the incoming sunray bombardment amounts to versus the surface of Earth.
Regards back radiation, as long as this planet is building a crust, there is more energy in longwave leaving this lava ball of ours, than incoming shortwave can provide.
Hence any such calculation to prove otherwise, that we are receiving more shortwave+longwave than we are emitting longwave energy, by means of models and nonsense mathematics, is pretty much moronic.
Oddgeir
Jim, the actual total solar insolation impacting the sphere is indeed equal to the average per square meter across the disk. Viewed from the sun, the earth is an equally illuminated disk. The calculus is done automatically for you by the geometry.
Now this may not be the point you are making.
Gary,
If that was the true physical case, then the poles would be receiving the same insolation as the equator. My point is that averaging the insolation does assume exactly that and that it is non-physical. It doesn’t allow for a temperature gradient from the equator to each pole.
Nor does it allow for more radiation from the Earth’s surfaces at the equator than the poles.
My goodness, read Planck’s dissertation on heat radiation and entropy. He uses calculus throughout. Should climate science be doing any less?
I know what your saying Jim, but it answers a simple question on the amount of solar insolation the earth receives. Given how it is actually is distributed is clearly much more complex than simply calculating insolation by latitude (atmospheric and oceanic circulations, radiation effects, weather phenomena, changes in enthalpy of water phases, earth’s spin …). This is the area that needs a revolution in thinking and analysis, and yet, they cling to Tyndall, Arhenius and Charney, venturing nowhere! At least Arhenius, Tyndall and Callender foresaw a net benefit to modest warming and higher CO2, a giant ste ahead of the consensus sorry lot.
There seems to be a very strong correlation (0.95) between increasing concern and publicity regarding climate AND decreasing standards of education in the USA.
This is not the case in Asia.
Yours is one of the truest observations I’ve ever seen in Comments sections and on social media, toorightmate.
I would add, though, not just in the USA but in all Western nations. I would, also, add that it’s not limited to concerns about climate change but it has expanded into many other areas. For instance, when a nominee to the US Supreme Court and now a sitting Justice cannot define what a woman is, along with many other powerful people in other western nations, I think it’s safe to say Science Is Dead.
Simply assuming a flat disk for the earth and an average insolation over the whole disk is beyond childish.
nobody does that,
https://github.com/MITgcm/MITgcm/tree/master/model/src
Has anyone seen calculation on how much “back radiation” is absorbed on its way back down?
back radiation is an effect not a cause of warming.
SMM –>
Really? See the image from Penn State! (Credit: David Bice © Penn State University is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0“)
Funny how all the radiation diagrams seem to use this to show how much back radiation is generated per sq meter, even at the poles!
SMM –>
You might want to let all the CAGW advocates know that “back radiation” doesn’t cause warming! I wonder where the 33 degrees of warming from CO2 comes from, especially if the atmosphere has to warm first before back radiation is generated?
You are displaying some cognitive disfunction today!
Really? See the image from Penn State! (Credit: David Bice © Penn State University is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0“)
that image doesnt respresent what happens in code
i gave you gcm code, you draw cartoons
Hey dude, this is what M. Mann has Penn St. teaching! The CARTOON as you call it is their diagram, not mine.
I’m sure they enjoy you calling their esteemed professors – CARTOONISTS. ROFLLMAO.
You might want to let all the CAGW advocates know that “back radiation” doesn’t cause warming! I wonder where the 33 degrees of warming from CO2 comes from, especially if the atmosphere has to warm first before back radiation is generated?
now im supposed to educate you and them.
c02 doesnt warm. it reduces cooling to space
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slPMD5i5Phg
when you can repeat this argument without notes, you understand how c02 operates.
other resources
https://scienceofdoom.com/2010/10/06/does-back-radiation-heat-the-ocean-part-one/
here.
look until you can reproduce this argument in your own words
without crib notes
you have no business talking about agw
https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.38.1876
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/02/what-is-the-best-description-of-the-greenhouse-effect/
Explain the diagram please. It sure looks like greenhouse gases radiate backward according to the totals.
Too bad so many of your compatriots just keep on repeating this failed argument.
Don’t try to show everyone you know more than me or anyone else.
If you had bothered to read any of the threads here you would know I have expounded on that very thing. CO2 results in a better insulation is all that occurs. N2/O2 act as a Thermal capacitor charged by CO2 and discharged across CO2 acting as a resistor.
Tell about your training in thermodynamics if you want to argue as an expert.
“Also, YouTube denied Heartland’s attempt at monetizing our channel, claiming our content is “harmful.”
Well they had to backtrack on the issue of manmade Covid that had been banned by totalitarians. Catastrophic Anthro Global Warming is definitely ‘in the tank’. I’ve been heralding this development even before last fall when I expressed concern for “Policy-Caused^тм” famine, hypothermia, collapse of social/health systems, employment, etc. having been baked-in for several years to come.
The crescendo of hysterical kitchen sink end -of-world Climate predictions now raining down willy nilly on us, is an unmistakable ‘tell’ that even useful fools are terrified that they are facing end-of-climateering jobs. The energetic output is the chicken-with-head-cut-off gymnastics
It used to be said that, ‘science advances one funeral at a time’.
Perhaps that will be the way the Climate Change Hoax will die a death.
That being the case, my seven-year-old grandson might reach old-age before it’s finally put to rest. But God knows what it will have cost him and the world before it happens….
Greetings, Mr. Passfield:
I tend to agree with your statement about ‘science advancing one funeral at a time,’ but in the case of the AGW hoax, there is a “built-in” factory for adherents to the whole of the scheme. It’s called the educational system. I’ve encountered any number of ‘educated’ individuals who will, without being asked, advise that humans are ‘destroying the planet’ and ‘we’re all going to fry’ and other such nonsense. Any attempt to reason with them, or discuss, rationally, the science of climatology and geology (my specialty) or even Meteorology (I’m fairly well-versed on this, having 11,000 hours of pilot-in-command time), is fruitless. They will not even listen, being so thoroughly indoctrinated. The ‘true believers’ are in seemingly endless supply.
They get an even greater grounding in the ‘non-science’ (nonsense) if they go to college, turning into the next generation of Michael Mann’s, and Al Gore’s and so on and so forth … … … They are adamant in their ‘beliefs’ and the non-falsifiability of those beliefs.
Much as I hope that you are right, I’m concerned that we’re in an infinite-feedback-loop of believers.
Peace, health, and prosperity to you and yours, Mr. P,
Vlad
Vlad, with the worst manmade economic mess created by EU, UK (and US Democrats), -empty foodstore shelves, global baked-in rising prices for everything, failed electricity grids, shut-in industries, unemployment …, these new grads won’t even be able to get jobs, even renewable installation jobs (they are switching back to fossil and nuclear and once they have things straightened out, they won’t go back to the renewables nightmare). They talk a story, but this Turkey is dead.
I can only hope you are right.
Godspeed,
VtI
Lysenko remained after Stalin, but without influence. Public support is always at the bottom of polls, and this winter looks like the beginning of the EU’s virtual Stalin’s death for climate alarmunism.
I agree Gary, one has to remain positive whilst all those green fools lose their heads, but they will finally listen when their hip pockets are getting bare. The Climate Turkey is on its way to the chopping block but is not yet dead! We still have to keep fighting this battle and making the public aware of why and how they are being fleeced, we still have to gain the moral ascendancy that will break the back of the ‘save the planet’-virtue signalers.
“we’re in an infinite-feedback-loop of believers.”
It’s called mass psychosis.
I’ve had many discussions with PHD level “scientists” over the years. No amount of empirical evidence or peer reviewed research can get true believers to budge from their delusions.
https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.38.1876
they’re good at fund raising and propagandizing ; not so good at real world implementation
It is harmful — to the Green Gilberts and their plan to destroy the western democracies.
Through censorship and propaganda they can fool most of the people most of the time. The climate cult can only be dismantled one person at a time by people who understand the science and can point out the flaws to the ignorant.
False narratives are being presented as unquestionable fact. People who lack a science background can’t help but be brainwashed.
The big lie underlying the house of cards is that an infinitesimal trace gas is the control knob for Earth’s climate. All conclusions based on this are invalid. Empirical measurements clearly show there is no climate crisis happening in the real world. False attribution is at the core of the misinformation being presented. Once that is exposed the whole charade collapses.
The best hope may well be time. In time all these school kids and students will reach an age where they realise that the climate hasn’t actually gone to hell in a handcart, as they were told it would.
Those who suffer cold winters will realise that they are still suffering cold winters. When they are cold they may start to ask “Where’s my global warming” as they look at their heating bill.
In the UK the Met Office promised us not just barbecue summers, but a “Mediterranean climate”. I think they quickly shut up a bit about that when they realised that 1) it wasn’t going to happen anytime soon, if ever, and 2) many UK residents would welcome such a change.
The propaganda has people convinced that every weather event outside of the average is a march towards doom. The normal wild extremes of weather are never going to stop so they will always have evidence in support of the false narrative. Most people I know think extreme weather has increased due to the incessant lies they hear. Their world view comes from media not personal experience.
I hope you are correct that enough people will notice the fear mongering has no substance. I don’t see the political will to tell the truth anywhere on Earth.
I agree. Normal bad weather, drought, floods, fires – has been weaponized by the greens. Look at the hysteria at anything remotely coming close to a “severe weather event” — This is probably the biggest challenge – to deconstruct earth’s bad weather back to normal
So true mate, loved the comment!
“If you tell a lie big enough, and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”, is also a lie.
Studies have shown that it only takes hearing a lie 5 times for humans to accept it as truth. Once that happens it is almost impossible for the person to change their mind. My personal experience validates this. I’ve been providing peer reviewed research, empirical measurements and logical arguments to the brainwashed for 25 years. Not once have I seen anyone admit they hold a false belief.
Sorry, I don’t believe that. I do my own independent research from multiple trusted sources before arriving at a factual consensus. Even then, I remain open minded to new input which may either confirm, convert or refute my own assessments.
Just because you critically examine issues doesn’t refute the fact that most people do accept lies as truth through repetition. The media presents blatant lies as unquestionable truth. Anyone not asking “is this true?” the first time they hear it can’t help but be programmed.
I couldn’t find the “5 lies” paper I read almost 50 years ago in a psychology class quickly but this one examines the effect.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256486791_Credibility_of_repeated_statements_Memory_for_trivia
I used to believe in Father Xmas too until I realized it was the poor schmuck paying off the plastic in Jan..Feb..March.. Nothing like a mortgage and a couple of kids to knock those Marxist uni lies out of you and the older I get the smarter I realize my folks were.
All it takes to change someone’s mind is ONE significant emotional event. That emotional event might be not being able to afford to both eat and drive to work. It may be a blackout that lasts for several hours in the heat of the day or the freezing night. It may be when government thugs come by and confiscate your gasoline powered backup generator.
There are far too many greenies that are totally isolated from reality through the funding of their lifestyle by government or parents. That *is* going to change if we continue on the same course. Significant emotional events will become commonplace. So will all the whining from those who have encountered a rude awakening.
I hope rude awakenings can happen but don’t hope for the conditions that would facilitate them..
I have noticed a marked increase of Australians on blogs discussing unreliable energy supply sources and the rising price of electricity and gas.
Yes the fightback has started, but discussions have to extend from blogs to the general media most people watch or read not just Sky News or ‘The Australian’. After all people want to hear some good news, and the climate sceptic story is a positive one. Get it out there people.
Jim Lakely is incorrect about Steven Crowder – he has been demonetized on YouTube for years. He makes money from subscriptions to MugClub, sponsorships, and selling merchandise